Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard/mapping/Appendix

< Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard | mapping

Appendix: Movement Charter Agreements / Disagreements Content with Sources

edit

 

SUMMARY
CONTEXT
PURPOSE
MAPPING
PROPOSALS
BEST PRACTICES


Movement Values

edit

1. Is Wikimedia a movement?

edit
Areas of Divergence / Open Questions

1.1. Is Wikimedia truly a movement, and if it is, what defines it?

Sources:

  • “Expressed disagreement with the concept of a "movement" in general and charter draft definition of it in particular.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)

2. Would Wikimedia as a movement benefit from common values?

edit
Areas of Divergence / Open Questions

2.1. Can the values expressed in a movement charter have meaning if not more deeply discussed with and validated by the movement?

Sources:

  • “Proposed values have not received wider validation by the Movement to affirm that they are shared and also that they are properly prioritized.” (WMF May 3, 2024)
  • “Many of these aspects merit deeper philosophical discussions.” (WMUY, April 16, 2024)

2.2. Are the core values of the project communities sufficiently represented?

Sources:

  • “The Charter does not seem to explicitly address the community's values. It can be seen that the document intends to guarantee the community's values, but then they are not explicitly stated.” (WikiCon pt, April 17, 2024)
Areas of Alignment

2.3. Common values are important and helpful for the movement.

Sources:

  • “Welcoming values section to guide the Wikimedia movement on the most abstract level.” (WMBR, April 15)

3. How do we balance equity and other core values?

edit
Areas of Divergence / Open Questions

3.1. How do we balance the emphasis on equity with the current definition of evidence-based knowledge?

Sources:

  • “The emphasis on equity could lead to a focus on promoting certain viewpoints over others, rather than prioritizing evidence-based knowledge.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)

3.2. In particular, how does the collection of indigenous knowledge, well in line with equity and inclusion, fit with this definition of evidence-based knowledge?

Sources:

  • “Request to add the commitment to multilingualism.” (WMBR, April 15)
  • “Suggestion to include a commitment to ethical sharing and good practices in relation to non-hegemonic worldviews and ways of knowing, such as indigenous knowledge and collections.” (WMBR, April 15)

3.3. How do we ensure values are not used to justify censorship or the suppression of certain viewpoints?

Sources:

Areas of Alignment

3.4. Values of equity and inclusion open the pathways for diverse participation and content creation.

Sources:

  • “We must act collectively to ensure that the most vulnerable and under-represented communities can participate meaningfully in Wikimedia.” (WMBR, April 15)
  • “Need to go further in addressing issues of equity and inclusivity.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)

4. What values are missing (in the proposed text)?

edit
Areas of Divergence / Open Questions

Should we include:

  • 4.1. commitments to multilingualism and ethical sharing practices;
    • “Request to add the commitment to multilingualism.” (WMBR, April 15)
    • “Suggestion to include a commitment to ethical sharing and good practices in relation to non-hegemonic worldviews and ways of knowing, such as indigenous knowledge and collections.” (WMBR, April 15)
  • 4.2. provisions for transparency and accountability;
  • 4.3. protection of free speech and diversity of viewpoints; and
  • 4.4. principles of neutrality and impartiality, including clear stance on advertising and commercial influence?

Movement Governance

edit

5. What is a good distribution of responsibilities / power in the movement?

edit
Areas of Divergence / Open Questions

5.1. How do we address the tension between professional organizational structures and online project communities, rooted in volunteering?

Sources:

  • “We understand the tensions that often exist between professional organizational structures and people who voluntarily donate their time to collaborate on Wikimedia platforms or lead initiatives outside of them, but that tension is not resolved by delegating strategic planning and resource allocation to volunteers.” (WMUY, April 16, 2024)

5.2. Is it necessary to ensure separation of powers and autonomy of a new global governance body (global council), including its finances and staffing?

Sources:

  • “The Global Council should have more autonomy and decision-making power.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “The Global Council should have an independent budget and decision-making power over its own finances.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “There should be a clear separation of powers between the Global Council and the Wikimedia Foundation, with the Global Council having autonomy over its own decisions and actions.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “The Global Council should have a clear and separate role from the Wikimedia Foundation, with a focus on supporting and empowering affiliates and individual contributors.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “The Global Council must have directly managed staff, which must report directly to the Global Council Board.” (Wikimedia Summit 2024 statements, April 21, 2024)
  • “There must be a clear separation of powers (e.g. decision-making and resource distribution) between the Global Council and Wikimedia Foundation. This must include a roadmap for transferring those powers over time, with an operational plan.” (Wikimedia Summit 2024 statements, April 21, 2024)
  • “The Global Council must be guaranteed an independent budget, separate from the Wikimedia Foundation’s general budget, which the Global Council handles autonomously. The Global Council’s budget has to be approved by its members.” (Wikimedia Summit 2024 statements, April 21, 2024)
  • “Codifying the independence of the Global Council ment, remains by and large the same.” (WMNL, April 30, 2024)
  • “For the Global Council (GC) to effectively serve the interests of the movement and promote free knowledge, it's crucial to reduce its dependence on a single organization, namely the Wikimedia Foundation. To achieve this, we propose that during its establishment and transition, the GC should ideally be allocated a multi-year budget (4-5 years) instead of needing to seek funding from the WMF annually.” (WMDE, April 30, 2024)
  • “Similarly, to mitigate the risk of undue influence, it's important to consider the staffing arrangements for the GC. Rather than relying solely on WMF staff, we suggest employing staff by other entities within the movement. This would help ensure the independence of the support provided to the Global Council.” (WMDE, April 30, 2024)
  • “Specifying that the Global Council is the highest ranking decision making body in the movement” (WMNL, April 30, 2024)
  • “We believe it is essential to promote the independence of the CG over the WMF.” (WMCL, May 1, 2024)
  • “The Global Council must have its own resources to maintain its independence.” (WMAR, May 3, 2024)
Areas of Alignment

5.3. Lack of clarity regarding responsibilities and relationships between movement entities leads to overlaps and insecurity.

Sources:

  • “There is a persistent conflation in the charter between the Wikimedia platforms, the Wikimedia movement, and the organizations implementing the Wikimedia movement's strategy.” (WMUY, April 16, 2024)
  • “There is consensus on how this lack of clarity about the current roles, responsibilities and relationships between the different bodies (chapters, user groups, thematic groups, informal collectives, non-affiliated groups funded by the WMF, Hubs, etc.) generates overlaps in action and insecure environments (mistrust).” (WikiCon pt, April 17, 2024)
  • “More specific definition of the roles and responsibilities of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees is needed.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)

5.4. There are decisions that can be made closer to those affected. There are responsibilities that can be devolved from the Wikimedia Foundation.

Sources:

  • “We feel that the Charter does not go far enough to bring about the decentralisation of power and the equity in decision making in movement governance, as prioritised during the Movement Strategy process. The position of WMF as the single decision making body within the movement, remains by and large the same.” (WMNL, April 30, 2024)
  • “In current proposals too much power to the Wikimedia Foundation, therefore upsetting the distribution of power.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “The governance structure of the Wikimedia movement should prioritize decentralization and grassroots leadership, with a focus on supporting local communities and initiatives.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “Decision-making processes should be located as close to those affected by the decisions as possible, rather than being centralized.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)

5.5. Charter, as proposed in June 2024, may lead to power imbalance. There need to be sufficient “checks and balances” to prevent abuse of power / conflicting interests.

Sources:

  • “A charter may create a power imbalance between different groups within the Wikimedia movement, and it may not provide sufficient checks and balances to prevent abuse of power.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “Charter draft proposes a different centralization of power with potential for abuse and conflicts of interest.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “Transparency not only promotes accountability, but also allows marginalized voices to be heard, ensuring that the policies adopted address the needs and realities of all affected communities.” (WMCO, April 16, 2024)

6. How to best ensure good representation of diverse perspectives in global decision-making?

edit
Areas of Divergence / Open Questions

6.1. How can we do more than the prior proposal to ensure online project communities factor into decision-making structures and processes?

Sources:

  • “Overall inadequate representation of project community interests in the movement strategy and charter conversations.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “More representative, collective and equitable mechanisms, such as the formation of collegiate slates or finally appointment by non-electoral methods (random selection from a diverse pool of candidates combined with appointment by competence), can be bolder and more effective in defining our leadership in a fair and inclusive way.” (WMBR, April 15)
  • “Processes must ensure that unorganized volunteers are significantly represented in regional batches of seats.” (Wikimedia Summit 2024 statements, April 21, 2024)
  • “Currently, there is no clear and compelling explanation of how the current Global Council proposal will ensure equity in decision-making.” (WMF May 3, 2024)
  • “The document should explain how the Global Council design will make decision-making more equitable.” (WMF May 3, 2024)

6.2. Should Wikimedia movement governance rely on wide participation and grassroots leadership rooted in the logic of digital democracy?

Sources:

  • “A more regular practice of consulting the movement, in the logic of digital democracy and electronic referendums, will guarantee empowering participatory governance, built on our digital interconnection network.” (WMBR, April 15)
  • “Establish a more localized structure aimed at drawing up bottom-up plans, developed by the communities and then passed on for consensus to thematic or regional bodies.” (WMBR, April 15)
  • “The adoption of deeper democratic practices in our movement for decision-making and for the selection of the Global Council.” (WMBR, April 15)

6.3. Do governance mechanisms that rest only on the shoulders of volunteers create imbalance in participation and, if so, what level of professional support is needed?

Sources:

  • “Serious concern that an entire global governance structure is proposed to rest on volunteers, in a context where affiliates and the movement in general are finding it increasingly difficult to fill critical maintenance tasks with volunteers.” (WMUY, April 16, 2024)
  • “The different contexts must be taken into account to facilitate participation. Many volunteers do not always have the possibility to participate in Wikimedia activities and projects, as they are in precarious conditions.” (WMCO, April 16, 2024)
  • “The capacity of the movement's volunteers was valued, but it was also pointed out that the burden and demands of this work would probably require professionalization. Some people indicated a preference for professionalizing the volunteer community itself to do this, and others pointed out that there are professionals from outside the movement whose skills and experience could be very useful for carrying out this work efficiently.” (WikiCon pt, April 17, 2024)
  • “Volunteer Governance Structures: It is concerning to propose a global governance structure entirely dependent on volunteers, especially when it's challenging to cover critical tasks without staff.” (WikiEsfera, April 17, 2024)

6.4. How can we ensure structures do enough to foster equity and diversity in decision-making?

Sources:

Areas of Alignment

6.5. Ensuring that the movement decision-making is truly representative of its global community needs further work.

Sources:

  • “More work is needed to ensure that the movement's decision-making is truly representative of its global community.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “The GC should have a number of members that allows for the representation of the different communities but facilitates decision making.” (WMCL, May 1, 2024)

6.6. Need for clear accountability mechanisms for the proposed new governance structure.

Sources:

6.7. Representation of marginalized communities is currently lacking in decision-making structures and processes.

Sources:

  • “Lack of representation for marginalized communities and inadequate attention given to the needs of small language communities.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “Lack of clarity in the Global Council proposal may result in potential marginalization of thematic groups and affiliates, as well as underrepresented voices, in the decision-making process.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “Lack of consideration of a potential impact of a charter on non-Western perspectives and the disproportionate impact on certain groups in the free knowledge space.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)

6.8. Need for clearer mechanisms to ensure diversity in future decision-making structures.

Sources:

  • “There should be a clearer mechanism for diversity and representation within the Global Council.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “The value of inclusion is not only about mutual respect for diversity, but also about promoting diverse environments and communities. There are still multiple barriers to participation for groups and individuals with diverse ethnic and gender identities, as well as diverse abilities.” (WMCO, April 16, 2024)
  • “Women in the Global Council: It is crucial to emphasize that the presence of women in the Global Council should not be viewed merely as a diversity issue. Women are not diversity. Women make up more than half of the world's population, and their proper representation is essential to reflect demographic reality and ensure equity in decision-making.” (WikiEsfera, April 17, 2024)
  • “There must be clarity about Global Council Assembly composition and how its representatives are elected in the Charter from the outset.” (Wikimedia Summit 2024 statements, April 21, 2024)

7. What is the purpose of a global council? If one should be established, how?

edit
Areas of Divergence / Open Questions

7.1. What is the scope, role, and accountability mechanism of a global council, vis-à-vis existing structures, and what problems does it solve?

Sources:

  • “Overall, the Charter lacks clarity and specificity, particularly regarding the Global Council.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “The Global Council should have a more defined role and responsibilities.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “Lack of clarity about the Global Council's composition, election process, and representation, especially on the lack of term limits and removal processes for Global Council members.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “The Global Council must be the highest decision-making body in the movement on strategy and budget.” (Wikimedia Summit 2024 statements, April 21, 2024)
  • “The document should explain the rationale for the proposed size and make-up of the Council. Having such clarity will also provide guidance on how to evaluate the effectiveness of the Global Council once it is operational and define its success.” (WMF May 3, 2024)
  • “Strategic and Operational Confusion: The lack of clear distinction between strategic and operational levels can lead to inefficiencies and overburden volunteers, who should not manage strategic planning or resource allocation.” (WikiEsfera, April 17, 2024)

7.2. Would the establishment of a global council lead to a different type of centralization, instead of empowering project communities and affiliates?

Sources:

  • “The Global Council should be more focused on supporting and empowering affiliates and individual contributors, rather than taking on a more centralized role.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “Overload of Responsibilities at the Global Council: It is concerning that the Global Council is designed to simultaneously handle multiple complex responsibilities, such as strategy, grant management, and coordination of over 100 members, without clearly defined structures. This lack of definition can lead to inefficiencies and work overload, potentially compromising the council's effectiveness in fulfilling its key objectives and responsibilities.” (WikiEsfera, April 17, 2024)

7.3. What are the meaningful steps in experimenting, evaluating, and iterating, before firmly establishing a new global council?

Sources:

  • “The Global Council needs to be approached as a pilot initiative, in line with the Movement Strategy Recommendation to evaluate, iterate, and adapt.” (WMF May 3, 2024)
  • “The best use of the resources should be determined in more detail at the implementation stage itself.” (WMF May 3, 2024)

7.4. How much would a new governance system cost, in time and financial resources?

Sources:

  • “Potential costs and financial burden of the Global Council.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “The Global Council's potential to become overly bureaucratic, which would slow down decision-making processes for the Wikimedia movement globally.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “The Global Council cost, both in financial terms and in terms of volunteers' time, is still unclear, and could require significant trade-offs with other Mission priorities.” (WMF May 3, 2024)
  • “The financial and volunteer resources to support the Global Council's success must be considered alongside the support for other critical work in the Movement.” (WMF May 3, 2024)
  • “An assembly of 100 -150 members is not realistic. The number should not exceed 50 representatives.” (WMAR, May 3, 2024)

7.5. How would existing structures transition responsibilities to a new global council?

Sources:

  • “The Global Council should have a more defined relationship with the Wikimedia Foundation, and that there should be clearer guidelines for their collaboration and decision-making processes.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “Potential for conflicts of interest between the Global Council and the Wikimedia Foundation.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “Provide a clearer definition of the relationships between the main actors in the Movement, including the Global Council, the Board of Trustees, and the Wikimedia Foundation, and their role and responsibilities.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “As it stands, the Global Council (GC) is positioned as an advisory body with various tasks and responsibilities but lacks decision-making authority. While we agree with the idea of the GC serving as the representative strategic body of the Wikimedia Movement, there's ambiguity regarding how both the GC and the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) can function as the highest governing bodies. This ambiguity needs clarification within the charter.” (WMDE, April 30, 2024)
  • “Committee Transition: The Movement Charter lacks a clear plan for transitioning existing committees that handle affiliations and resource allocation, potentially leading to management discontinuities.” (WikiEsfera, April 17, 2024)
  • “We believe that clear prerogatives of the CG over the WMF should be established, so that there is an effective distribution of decision making.” (WMCL, May 1, 2024)

7.6. How would we avoid unnecessary duplication and parallel decision-making?

Sources:

  • “The transition to the new governance structure could potentially result in parallel processes or additional burdens on volunteers and communities. Overall perceived emphasis on bureaucracy and “red tape”.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
Areas of Alignment

7.7. If devised, a global council needs to have clarity of role and scope and responsibilities.

Sources:

  • “Global Council Concerns: We need clarity on the goals of the Global Council, the problems it will solve, and how its decisions will be accountable to other groups.” (WikiEsfera, April 17, 2024)
  • “There must be a more clearly expressed purpose of the Global Council which addresses strategy, finance and structure to improve decision-making in and for the movement.” (Wikimedia Summit 2024 statements, April 21, 2024)
  • “The purpose of the Global Council can and must be clear.” (WMF May 3, 2024)
  • “Only if it is clearly articulated how establishing it effectively addresses the shortcomings of the current structures that the Global Council is designed to address and why this formulation is expected to be impactful, then Wikimedians can truly understand what they are voting on).” (WMF May 3, 2024)
  • “The document should explain how forming the Global Council helps the movement better achieve its public interest mission of collecting and sharing free knowledge with the world.” (WMF May 3, 2024)

7.8. We need clear accountability mechanisms for new governance structures.

Sources:

  • “The Global Council should be accountable to the community.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “There must be a process for the Global Council to be held accountable to the movement. The Charter must address how the Global Council’s work is evaluated by stakeholders.” (Wikimedia Summit 2024 statements, April 21, 2024)
  • “The proposed representations must also ensure that there is a balanced participation by region, prioritizing affiliates that respond to geographic criteria and representation of underrepresented populations.” (WMF May 3, 2024)
  • “We believe that it is essential that the affiliates but also the structures that exist within the movement, such as the Regional Committees for the distribution of resources, can advise the GC on their needs linked to the learning processes around leadership, the distribution of resources, the of decisions, the creation and evaluation of strategies, etc.” (WMCL, May 1, 2024)

8. How do movement level policies interact with project community autonomy?

edit
Areas of Divergence / Open Questions

8.1. How do we include online contributor rights in the charter in a way that respects the appropriate autonomy of our project communities?

Sources:

  • “Not have an indication that a volunteer must commit sufficient time and skills to participate in the Wikimedia Movement, as this is both a self-evident requirement and one that can encourage controlling practices when inserted into a charter.” (WMBR, April 15)

8.2. Do we need to extend the definition of contributors to include organizers and technical developers, etc.?

Sources:

  • “We celebrate that the concept of “volunteer” transcends the classic definition associated with contributors in Wikimedia projects to make room for new ways of contributing that are just as important.” (WMAR, May 3, 2024)
Areas of Alignment

8.3. Clarity is needed on how global policies interact with and impact project community autonomy and self-determination.

Sources:

  • “Prioritize the rights and autonomy of volunteers, and ensure collaborative and community-driven decision-making rather than being controlled by a centralized authority.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “Agree with the emphasis placed on the editorial autonomy of the Wikimedia community of volunteers.” (WMBR, April 15)
  • “The Universal Code of Conduct, community and technical strategic plans and other transversal guidelines of the Wikimedia Movement, with an impact on all projects and their participants, as well as the Movement Charter, must ensure and coexist with community self-determination in the realization of our common mission.” (WMBR, April 15)
  • “Assess the impact of potential impact of proposed changes on the autonomy and self-organization of the projects.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “Focus on supporting the work of volunteers, rather than trying to impose a top-down structure or bureaucracy.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “The potential for a charter to be used to justify the imposition of bureaucratic or administrative burdens on volunteers, rather than supporting their work and contributions.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)

Movement Ecosystem

edit

9. What is the future role of affiliates in the movement ecosystem?

edit
Areas of Divergence / Open Questions

9.1. How do we ensure the role and autonomy of project communities is respected?

Sources:

  • “Too much power proposed to the Wikimedia movement affiliates, which may not always act in the best interests of the Wikimedia movement or its core purpose but are set to be given a lot of power and autonomy.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “Prioritization of the interests of affiliates over those of volunteer contributors.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)

9.2. What are the roles and responsibilities of the different types of affiliates?

Sources:

  • “We welcome the fact that the UGs must formalize as entities (thematic organizations or chapters) to integrate a Hub and suggest that they receive support from the community or WMF for this process.” (WMCL, May 1, 2024)

9.3. How can we foster further collaboration between affiliates?

Sources “Welcome the intention to promote collaboration among affiliates and the sense of decentralizing certain decision-making within the movement.” (WMCL, May 1, 2024)

Areas of Alignment

9.4. There need to be changes to the affiliation model, accounting for longstanding conversations in the movement.

Sources:

  • “The affiliate model is maintained in a similar way, without resolving the multiple discussions and debates that have taken place for years in this regard.” (WMAR, May 3, 2024)
  • “Recommend giving more space to define the role and importance of the affiliates as the organized community within the movement.” (WMCL, May 1, 2024)
  • “Rights and Benefits for Affiliates: It is crucial to state that current documentation specifies the duties and obligations of affiliates but does not clearly detail their rights or the benefits of being part of the Wikimedia Movement. Clarifying and communicating the advantages of joining such an international initiative is important.” (WikiEsfera, April 17, 2024)
  • “Hubs and affiliates must have a right to participate in developing core technology.” (Wikimedia Summit 2024 statements, April 21, 2024)
  • “Supplementary documents must have official status. They can be amended by simple resolution of the Global Council or one of its bodies.” (Wikimedia Summit 2024 statements, April 21, 2024)

10. What is the future role of the hubs?

edit
Areas of Divergence / Open Questions

10.1. Would a clearer definition of regions of the movement help us align on hubs?

Sources:

  • “The 8 regions that today serve as criteria for analysis and decision-making for the movement should not disappear. But they may be expanded or modified in the future to further enhance the local perspective.” (WMCL, May 1, 2024)
Areas of Alignment

10.2. Hubs need to have a clear definition, including their expected connection with the rest of the movement ecosystem.

Sources:

  • “There is a general unfamiliarity with the concept of Hubs, which caused people to not see how they will solve problems within the Wikimedia movement.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “Hubs and affiliates must have a right to participate in developing core technology.” (Wikimedia Summit 2024 statements, April 21, 2024)
  • “There must be an increase in the baseline requirement to start a Hub. Minimum of three founding affiliate members. External organizations can join as a fourth founding member.” (Wikimedia Summit 2024 statements, April 21, 2024)
  • “It is positive that the Hubs are institutionalized as structures within the Wikimedia ecosystem.” (WMCL, May 1, 2024)
  • “Hubs should have a clear definition as intermediate spaces for collaboration between affiliates, which allow and promote the development of new regional or thematic communities.” (WMCL, May 1, 2024)

11. What is the future role of the Wikimedia Foundation?

edit
Areas of Divergence / Open Questions

11.1. How are the changes in the role of the Wikimedia Foundation, or lack of change in the role, aligned with the overall direction of Wikimedia 2030 movement strategy recommendations?

Sources:

  • “The exceptional position given to the Wikimedia Foundation in the current Movement Charter weakens our real commitment to the 2030 Movement Strategy and inhibits a greater connection of the Wikimedia Foundation to community practices, which will ultimately guarantee it more legitimacy and robustness.” (WMBR, April 15)

11.2. What will be the core functions the Wikimedia Foundation delivers to the movement?

Sources:

  • “An advisory council to help provide feedback and advice for the Foundation's Product & Technology department.” (WMF February 29, 2024)
  • “the transformation of the Technology Committee into a deliberative and executive body, not merely a consultative one, with responsibility for evaluating and approving the strategic plan for the Wikimedia Movement's socio-technical infrastructure.” (WMBR, April 15)
  • “The Wikimedia Foundation continues to serve as a technical platform operator.” (WMF February 29, 2024)
  • “The Wikimedia Foundation to continue to serve as brand steward.” (WMF February 29, 2024)

“There is no significant change in the functions of WMF and its role in the Movement.” (WMAR, May 3, 2024) “Maintain the Foundation’s current legal structure.” (WMF February 29, 2024)

Areas of Alignment

11.3. Clarity of the Foundation’s roles and responsibilities is essential to avoid overlap and misalignment.

Sources:

12. How do we ensure safe environments within our ecosystem?

edit
Areas of Alignment

12.1. Providing safe space to volunteers is essential and a priority in supporting volunteer participation on any level.

Sources:

  • “Prioritize the protection of volunteers' labor and contributions, and ensure that they are not exploited or taken advantage of.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)

12.2. Clear mechanisms for conflict resolution in the movement are needed and welcomed.

Sources:

  • “Conflict Resolution: Clearly defining who will manage conflicts within the Wikimedia Movement is essential. A fair, transparent, and accessible dispute resolution system must be established, and it must include mechanisms to manage disagreements at both local and global levels, ensuring all parties have the opportunity to be heard and that resolutions are based on principles of equity and justice, and gender perspective is also applied.” (WikiEsfera, April 17, 2024)
  • “We understand the self-management of projects, also when it comes to resolving conflicts, but then the code of conduct will not have application in Wikimedia projects?” (WMAR, May 3, 2024)

Movement Resources

edit

13. What is the best system to distribute funds within the movement?

edit
Areas of Divergence / Open Questions

13.1. Would financial incentives enable more equitable participation?

Sources:

  • “Therefore, we propose the establishment of differential monetary recognition mechanisms for the time dedicated and resources (material, cognitive, social) used for participation. This implies generating strategies for the distribution of this compensation according to the differential inequalities of the people.” (WMCO, April 16, 2024)
  • “Support for Volunteers: Adequate support must be guaranteed for volunteers, including compensation for time and resources used, and training in political skills and decision-making to avoid promoting precarious conditions and extractivism that only allows privileged individuals to participate continuously in the Movement.” (WikiEsfera, April 17, 2024)
  • “There must be an allowance for thematic organisations and chapters that cannot incorporate locally to operate with fiscal sponsors.” (Wikimedia Summit 2024 statements, April 21, 2024)

13.2. As the Board of Trustees approves the overall budget for the Wikimedia Foundation each year as part of the annual planning process, what are opportunities for movement input on resource allocation within the approved budget? Read more in Section 4: proposals 1.

Consideration: Some have called for the Wikimedia Foundation budget to be validated by the community. Foundation holds that the Board of Trustees, at least half of which are community selected, has responsibility for setting the Foundation's overall budget and planning, welcoming advisory input on the grants portion.

Sources:

  • “The Board of Trustees is ultimately responsible for setting the Foundation's overall budget and planning, welcoming advisory input from the GC on the grants portion of the Foundation's budget.” (WMF February 29, 2024)
  • “The inclusion of the Wikimedia Foundation's budget as an object of validation and accountability of the Wikimedia Movement, especially with regard to the budget of the community resource areas, as we believe that the permeability of the foundation to the collective intelligence of our movement will ensure greater trust and strategic alignment (WMBR, April 15)
  • “The Global Council may decide on the strategy, resources and budget of the WMF.” (WMCL, May 1, 2024)
  • “Specifying that the Global Council is the highest ranking decision making body in the movement, with regards to, amongst other things, resource distribution.” (WMNL, April 30, 2024)
Areas of Alignment

13.3. Devolve grant allocation, both on the strategic and operational level, from the Wikimedia Foundation

Sources:

13.4. Provide more clear guidelines for global resourcing.

Sources:

  • “Provide more detailed guidelines for resource distribution.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “Need to explain more clearly about the global distribution of funds and resources.” (Voter comments June-July 2024)
  • “For resource distribution, there must be ‘full transparency’ added as a value at every level, for all parties, and to the criteria for decision-making.” (Wikimedia Summit 2024 statements, April 21, 2024)
  • “The percentage of resources on which the proposed Global Council will have to make decisions should be defined. It is also necessary to define the structure in terms of campaigns, fundraising, technology and resource allocation, in particular, what this structure will look like in dialogue with the Wikimedia Foundation.” (WMUY, April 16, 2024)

14. How can we better engage local and regional organizations in movement revenue generation?

edit
Areas of Divergence / Open Questions

14.1. As banner fundraising is closely tied with platform operations and continues to be led by the Wikimedia Foundation due to legal and policy obligations, how can we explore diversifying streams of revenue for movement entities beyond banners?

Consideration: While the Wikimedia Foundation holds that banner fundraising will not be open to all movement bodies due to legal and policy obligations that rely on the Foundation’s infrastructure, are there other ways of diversifying streams of revenue for movement entities beyond banners?

Sources:

  • “Retain the current principles for banner fundraising on the Wikimedia Projects. We see banner fundraising as inextricably intertwined with the operations of the website. As the platform operator, there will be legal and policy obligations for fundraising activities that rely on the Foundation's infrastructure.” (WMF February 29, 2024)
  • “The Charter must develop a statement on the ‘basic right’ of all movement bodies to fundraise using ALL methods in accordance with the fundraising policy to be developed by the Global Council.” (Wikimedia Summit 2024 statements, April 21, 2024)
  • “The debate on fundraising is also not addressed.” (WMAR, May 3, 2024)

14.2. How can the Foundation and local affiliates collaborate on local donor outreach (given privacy laws and donor data retention policies)?

Consideration: The Foundation holds that it cannot share donor data in ways that are not consistent with policies or privacy laws. Given that, are there other ways that local affiliates and the Foundation can collaborate to support donor retention?

Sources:

  • “The Foundation will not be able to share donor data in ways that are not consistent with policies or privacy laws.” (WMF February 29, 2024)
  • “Introducing complete transparency about criteria and decisions in all phases of grant making, including giving affiliates more access to donor data from their region (to improve donor retention) within the limits posed by data protection legislation.” (WMNL, April 30, 2024)
  • “Greater involvement of local affiliates in fundraising activities and coordinated banner creation could significantly increase the fundraising pool. To enable this, we propose implementing a future mechanism granting affiliates decentralised access to country-specific donor data, adhering to the relevant privacy policies.” (WMDE, April 30, 2024)
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/mapping/Appendix&oldid=28193963"