Well thanks to Andreas for pointing this, I really believe that a movement advocating for the free sharing of knowledge can not afford to take royalist views on who is entitled or not to see the results of any audit and to reflect upon it.
I want to reflect on Illario’s previous words . Well it is not often I agree with Ilario on governance issues, but in this case I agree that the FDC has taken the adequate decision, one that allows us members, to point out to the board that the situation has to change on the basis of the FDC recommendation. Of course I will be called a nasty troll by the WMFR board for writing that (but now I share the condition with Ilario, which is real comforting). Apart from this, it is not a 3 solution dilemna like exposed by Ilario previoulsy, because we are not solving a mathematical or computing problem, but initiating a negociation process with human beings embedded in a conflict who are feeling emotions. One cannot eradicate resentment by taking a computational approach to solve conflicts between humans, because humans first need to be heard before willing to collaborate : a mediation process always start by the presentation of each position. These positions usually move in the process, they are not rigid. To be successful each party (and there are obviously more than two parties there, there are a variety of different positions) has to let the other speak and express their point of vue, otherwise we might fall in a starvation case (but surely there are less radical solutions than just the 3 ones presented by you that allow to have hope and not fear of ”plug pulling”, ”burning” ect). If you have a look at this page https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikim%C3%A9dia_France/Assembl%C3%A9e_g%C3%A9n%C3%A9rale/septembre_2017#Point_de_l.27OJ_statutaire where a diversity of opinions and approaches are discussed to prepare the General Assembly, it will show you that we are not facing a minority showing extreme opinions: we are facing reasonable wikimedians, trying to find solutions and deeply concerned about the situation. So it is not correct to adopt a binary approach to present the situation. I find it very positive to discover all these point of views, just I I loved reading all the different point of views in the strategic review process initiated a few months ago by the WMF. Reading all this changes my own opinions. Friction of ideas is the basis of our movement. I remember Katherine Maher saying in a speech that this confrontation with other ideas in Wikipedia helps contributors to become more tolerant, and this is a vision that truly appeals to me. We should not be afraid of diverging opinions, we should be afraid of puritan and totalitarian pictures depicting everything as perfect. The positive thing is that the Board, whatever it does, will now have feedback and information. I work in human ressources: leaders need feedbacks to be efficient, in assessing leadership skills one will always look at the capacity of obtaining feedback, negociating, motivating and offering a vision for the future. I would also like to highlight I find this wording of yours problematic: "In some countries no profit association are linked to strict parameters and the governance is not an option. I don't know personally the system law of France, but I suppose that it's weaker than in other countries.” I dont think it is adequate to assume that the French system of law is weaker than in other countries (and which countries please?). Especially since you start by saying you dont know… Kind regards, Natacha Le 4 août 2017 à 18:00, Chris Keating <[email protected]> a écrit : > Interesting but: "The review, commissioned by Wikimedia UK..." exactly who? > Board, community, general assembly, group of members? > By the Board. The dynamics were different to the current situation with Wikimedia France, in that the Wikimedia UK Board at the time was not engaged in a big fight with its community. Regards, Chris (chair of Wikimedia UK at that point in time!) _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
