Thank you Natacha for the update on the French situation. What would really make me happy this week would be to witness a goodwill or wikilove gesture by the French board: let the members who were recently expelled join up again so that we can hold some meaningful discussions. Gabe
Le 8 août 2017 2:56 AM, "Natacha Rault" <[email protected]> a écrit : > Dear All, > > More than a quarter of Wikimedia France’s members have requested that > several topics be added and voted upon at he next general assembly to be > held in september in order to reflect on the current governance issues. > > The board has just confirmed that the minimum of members requested to do > this has now been reached, see here (in French) for more details > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikim%C3%A9dia_France/ > Assembl%C3%A9e_g%C3%A9n%C3%A9rale/septembre_2017/Points_% > C3%A0_ajouter_%C3%A0_l%27ordre_du_jour <https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikim%C3%A9dia_France/Assembl%C3%A9e_g%C3%A9n%C3% > A9rale/septembre_2017/Points_%C3%A0_ajouter_%C3%A0_l'ordre_du_jour> > > We hope that we will be able to achieve a sound democratic debate and > start working towards a resolution of the problems recently encountered. I > am personally really happy to see that a significant number of members have > expressed ideas and worked collaboratively to express their point of view. > > Kind regards, > > Nattes à chat > > #whatmakesmehappythisweek > > > Le 4 août 2017 à 21:46, Devouard (gmail) <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > > Le 04/08/2017 à 18:17, Gabriel Thullen a écrit : > >> What is important here is that trust has to be rebuilt between the > chapter > >> members on one hand and the board & senior staff on the other hand. > >> The way I understand the situation is that the board has expelled a few > >> vocal opponents, a few board members have resigned, one staffer was > fired > >> for refusing to censor a mailing list, some chapter members have had > their > >> membership renewal refused, some known contributors are not able to join > >> the chapter, and there are now 25 new chapter members out of the blue. I > >> may be incorrect on one or two minor details, but I think that sums it > up. > > > > It far from sum-it-up. > > > > There is also *very* disrespectful behavior from staff and management, > including > > * non respect of "friendly space policy" and comments directed to a very > involved member with autistic traits such as "it is you who should adapt > and you need to grow up to become an adult" > > * paternalistic behavior toward volunteers such as "you still have not > understood what I was saying. Let's meet face to face and I will explain to > you *again* so that you *really* get it" > > * legal threats toward volunteers who ask questions > > * referring to members in a very belittling way : "tartempion" or > "pigiste" > > * refusal to acknowledge authorship of action from volunteers (such as > "no author name in wiki newsletter") > > * emails sent to board by members to "report issues" are immediately > forwarded to the management, making it impossible to safely and > confidentially discuss issues > > * there has been cases of doxing by the management, using member private > data > > * set up of a black list of members that should not receive support by > staff in spite of being members. > > > > There is staff suffering, upon which it is difficult to comment > publicly, but is made quite obvious by the fact several staff members > joined and created a trade-union branch to be able to *defend* themselves. > > > > There are multiple rumors reported by members of quite "generous" > expenses reimbursement. Yet unclear due to non access to financial data. > > > > There are questions related to management using the resources and image > of the association, as well as WMF brand, to look for funding for a > mysterious entity no one knows anything about. Yet unanswered. > > > > There are questions related to using resources of the association to > gain a elected position. > > > > And a bunch of other things. Those would count as "one or two minor > details". > > > > > >> The board says it has had two audits already, but I believe that they > are > >> related to getting a certification - the IDEAS label - to help out with > >> fund raising. This is not a governance audit and they will not help us > find > >> an issue to this crisis. ( > >> http://ideas.asso.fr/fr/label/label-ideas-associations-fondations/) > > > > Absolutely correct. Those were certifications (and done prior to most of > our current issues). For example, a certification will check that there is > a Conflict of Interest Policy in place. And yes there is one. So there is > certification. > > > > What good is a COI policy when people do not report COI or when the > members of the committee do not have independance from those reporting > COI... that is another story. And this is when a governance audit can help. > > > > It may be that if WMF asks for a financial audit, only WMF will get the > outcome. > > > > Which is why we are currently voting so that the members get the RIGHT > to vote to ASK for a financial audit during the next General Assembly. > > > > But the amount of energy we have to spend to simply TRY to get answers > is frankly just wrong. > > > > Florence > > > > > >> I remain convinced that WMFR needs an independent governance audit, and > the > >> results should be made available to the chapter members and to the > staff. > >> Something drastic needs to be done so that this chapter can continue to > >> function. I also think that the members who have been expelled should be > >> allowed to rejoin the French chapter unconditionally. That is a goodwill > >> gesture that the current board can easily make and it will go a long way > >> towards finding a solution to this ridiculous situation. > >> The French press is starting to talk about what is going on at the > French > >> Wikimedia chapter, are we all waiting for CNN to come in as well? For > sure > >> that will get the WMF moving... > >> Best regards > >> Gabe > >> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 5:45 PM, Ilario Valdelli <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> Interesting but: "The review, commissioned by Wikimedia UK..." exactly > >>> who? Board, community, general assembly, group of members? > >>> > >>> Kind regards > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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> _______________________________________________ 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>
