ವಿಕಿಮೀಡಿಯಾ ಇಂಡಿಯಾ ಸಮ್ಮಿಟ್ ೨೦೨೪ತ ಯೋಜಿತ ಅನುಸರಣಾ ಚಟುವಟಿಕೆ ಆದ್, ಎಂಸಿಡಿಸಿ ಸದಸ್ಯೆರ್ ಬೊಕ್ಕ ಸಿಐಎಸ್-ಎ೨ಕೆ ಮೂಮೆಂಟ್ ಚಾರ್ಟರ್ ಬೊಕ್ಕ ಅಯಿಡ್ದ್ ಬೊಕ್ಕದ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಚರ್ಚೆ ಮಲ್ಪುನ ಒಂಜಿ ಸಮುದಾಯತಕುಲೆನ್ ಒಟ್ಟು ಸೇರ್ಪಾವುದ್ ಬುಲೆಪಾಯೆರೆ ಬದ್ಧರಾದುಲ್ಲೆರ್. ಎಪೊಲ ಪಾತೆರೊಕತೆ ಬೊಕ್ಕ ಎಪೊಲ ಪಾಲ್‌ದೆತೊಂತು ವಿಕಿಮೀಡಿಯಾ ಮೂಮೆಂಟ್‌ತ ಬುಲೆಚ್ಚಿಲ್‌ ಬೊಕ್ಕ ಅಭಿವೃದ್ಧಿಗ್ ಪರಿಣಾಮಕಾರಿಯಾದ್ ಕೊಡುಗೆ ಕೊರ್ಪಿನ ನಮ್ಮ ಪ್ರತಿನಿಧಿಲೆನ್ ಬೊಕ್ಕ ಸಮುದಾಯದಯೊತ ಸದಸ್ಯೆರೆನ್ ಬಲ ಮಾನ್ಪುನ ಉಮೇದ್ ಉಂಡು.
ಹಿನ್ನೆಲೆ
ಮಾರ್ಚ್ ೨೦೨೪ಡ್ ನಡತಿನ ವಿಕಿಮೀಡಿಯಾ ಇಂಡಿಯಾ ಶೃಂಗಸಭೆ ೨೦೨೪, ವಿಕಿಮೀಡಿಯಾ ಶೃಂಗಸಭೆದ ಪ್ರತಿನಿಧಿಲೆಗ್ ಒಂಜಿ ಮುಖ್ಯವಾಯಿನ ಶೃಂಗಸಭೆ ಪೂರ್ವ ಘಟನೆ ಆದ್ ಸೇವೆ ಮಲ್ತ್ಂಡ್. ಈ ಶೃಂಗಸಬೆಟ್ ಪಾಲ್ ದೆತೊಂದಿನ ಪ್ರತಿನಿಧಿಲೆಗ್, ದುಂಬಗ್ ಬರಿಯರ ಇಪ್ಪುನ ಶೃಂಗಸಭೆತ್ತ ಕಾರ್ಯಸೂಚಿಲೆನ್ ಚರ್ಚೆ ಮಲ್ಪೆರೆ ಬೊಕ್ಕ ಪರಿಷ್ಕರಣೆ ಮಲ್ಪರ ಈ ಶೃಂಗಸಬೆಟ್ ಪಾಲ್ ದೆತೊಂದಿನ ಪ್ರತಿನಿಧಿಲೆಗ್ ಒಂಜಿ ವೇದಿಕೆನ್ ಕೊರುಂಡು. ಶೃಂಗಸಬೆತ್ತ ಪೊರ್ತುಡು ಸಿಐಎಸ್-ಎ2ಕೆ ಬೊಕ್ಕ ದಕ್ಷಿಣ ಏಷ್ಯಾ ಬಾಗೊದ ಎಂಸಿಡಿಸಿ ಸದಸ್ಯೆರ್ ದಕ್ಷಿಣ ಏಷ್ಯಾದ ಸಮುದಾಯದ ಸದಸ್ಯೆರೆನೊಟ್ಟುಗು ಶೃಂಗಸಭೆತ ಪ್ರಮುಖ ಅಂಶೊಲೆನ್ ಬೊಕ್ಕ ಸಂಭಾಷಣೆಲೆನ್ ಚರ್ಚೆ ಮಲ್ಪುರ ಒಂಜಿ ಎಡ್ಡೆ ಸಾದಿ ಮಲ್ತ್ ಕೊರಿಯೆರ್.
ದುಂಬರಿಪುನ ಪಾತೆರಕತೆ ಬೊಕ್ಕ ಸಹಕಾರದ ಅಗತ್ಯೊನು ತೂದು, ಸಿಐಎಸ್-ಎ2ಕೆ ಬೊಕ್ಕ ಎಂಸಿಡಿಸಿದ ಒರಿ ಸದಸ್ಯೆರ್, ಶೃಂಗಸಭೆಡ್ದ್ ಬುಕ್ಕದ ಕೆಲವೊಂಜಿ ಬೇಲೆಲೆನ್ ಯೋಜಿಸಯೆರ್. ಪ್ರತಿನಿಧಿಲು ದಕ್ಷಿಣ ಏಷ್ಯಾದ ಸಮುದಾಯೊಲೊಟ್ಟುಗು ಶೃಂಗಸಭೆತ ಪ್ರಮುಖ ಅಂಸೊಲೆನ್ ಚರ್ಚೆ ಮಲ್ಪುನ, ಪಾಲ್ ಮಲ್ಪುನ ಬೊಕ್ಕ ತೆರಿಪಾವುನ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ನಿಗಂಟ್ ಮಲ್ಪುನ ಗುರಿ ದೀಯೊಂದು ಈ ಬೇಲೆನ್ ಸುರು ಮಲ್ತೆರ್.
ಉದ್ದೇಸೊಲು
- ವಿಕಿಮೀಡಿಯಾ ಚಳುವಳಿದ ಭವಿಷ್ಯೊನು ರೂಪಿಸಾವುನ ಗುರಿ ಸಾದನೆಗ್ ದಕ್ಷಿಣ ಏಷ್ಯಾದ ಸಮುದಾಯೊಲೆನ ಸಕ್ರಿಯ ಪಾಲ್ ಪಡೆವುನ ಬೊಕ್ಕ ಕೊಡುಗೆನ್ ನಿಗಂಟ್ ಮಲ್ಪುನ ಮೂಲಕ ಚಳುವಳಿದ ಚಾರ್ಟರ್ ದ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಪಾತೆರಕತೆ ಬುಡಂದೆ ದುಂಬರಿಪಾವುನ.
- ಒಂಜಿ ಭಾರತೀಯ ಸಮುದಾಯೊದ ರೂಪೊಡು ಚರ್ಚೆ ಮಲ್ಪುನ ಭವಿಷ್ಯದ ಸಹಯೋಗೊಲು ಬೊಕ್ಕ ಕ್ರಿಯಾತ್ಮಕ ಐಟಂಲು.
Planned Activities
ಮೂವ್ಮೆಂಟ್ ಚಾರ್ಟರ್ದ ರಾಯಭಾರಿಲೆನೊಟ್ಟುಗು ಸುರುತ ಲೆಪ್ಪು
ತಾರೀಕ್: ಜೂನ್ ೨೧, ೨೦೨೪ ಇವರೊಲು:
- ಸುರುಕು, ಇವರವಾದ್ ಒಂಜಿ ಟೆಂಪ್ಲೇಟ್‌ನ್ ಮಾತಾ ಪ್ರತಿನಿಧಿನಕ್ಲೆಗ್ ಪಟ್ಟುವೆರ್. ಈ ಟೆಂಪ್ಲೇಟ್, ಇಂದೆತ್ ಮಹತ್ವ, ಬೊಕ್ಕ ಪ್ರತಿನಿಧಿಲು ಅಕ್ಲೆನ ಸಮುದಾಯೊಲೆನೊಟ್ಟುಗು ಸಂವಹನ ಮಲ್ಪೆರೆ ಈ ಟೆಂಪ್ಲೇಟ್ ಎಡ್ಡೆ ಮಲ್ತ್ ಎಂಚ ಗಲಸೊಲಿ ಪಂದ್ ವಿವರಿಸೆರೆ ಈ ಒಂಜಿ ಸುರುತ ಲೆಪ್ಪುನು ಆಯೋಜನೆ ಮಲ್ತ್‌ದೆರ್.
- ರಡ್ಡನೆದ ದಾದ ಪಂಡ, ಈ ಲೆಪ್ಪು ಚಾರ್ಟರ್ದ ರಾಯಭಾರಿಲು ಚಳುವಳಿದ ಚಾರ್ಟರ್‌ನ್ ದಕ್ಷಿಣ ಏಷ್ಯಾದ ಸಮುದಾಯೊದ ಸದಸ್ಯೆರೊಟ್ಟುಗು ಇವರಿಸಾವರೆ, ಓಟುದ ಪ್ರಕ್ರಿಯೆ, ಬೊಕ್ಕ ಒಪ್ಪಿಗೆ ಪಡೆವರ ಬೋಡಾದ್ ಮಲ್ಪುನ ಸುರುತ ಲೆಪ್ಪು ಆದುಂಡು.
- ಮೂಜಿನೆದ, ಚಾರ್ಟರ್ದ ರಾಯಭಾರಿಲೆಡ್ ಒರಿ ದಕ್ಷಿಣ ಏಷ್ಯಾದ ಮುಕ್ತ ಸಮುದಾಯದೊಟ್ಟುಗು ಪಾತೆರ ಕತೆ ಮಲ್ಪುನ ಬಗೆಟ್ಟ್ ಒಂಜಿ ಪ್ರಕಟಣೆನ್ ಕೊರ್ಪೆರ್.
ಭಾರತೀಯ ಸಮುದಾಯೊಲೆನ ಪಾತೆರೊಕತೆ
- ಜೂನ್ ೨೨, ೨೦೨೪ದಾನಿ
- ಇವರೊಲು: ಚಳುವಳಿದ ಚಾರ್ಟರ್, ಓಟುದ ಪ್ರಕ್ರಿಯೆ ಬೊಕ್ಕ ಅನುಮೋದನೆನ್ ವಿವರಿಸೆರೆ ದಕ್ಷಿಣ ಏಷ್ಯಾದ ಸಮುದಾಯೊದೊಟ್ಟುಗು ಒಂಜಿ ಫಾಲೋ ಅಪ್ ಲೆಪ್ಪು ನಡಪವೆರ್. ಸಮುದಾಯೊ ಮಲ್ಲ ಮಟ್ಟೊಡು ಪಾಲ್ ದೆತೊನರ, ರಾಯಭಾರಿಲು ಅಕ್ಲೆನ ಸಮುದಾಯೊಲೆನ ಸದಸ್ಯೆರೆನ್ ಚರ್ಚೆಲೆಡ್ ಪಾಲ್ ಪಡೆಯೆರೆ ಪ್ರೋತ್ಸಾಹಿಸವೆರ್.
ವೈಯಕ್ತಿಕ ಲೇಸ್
- ೨೦೨೪ನೇ ಜೂನ್ ೨೮ಡ್ದ್ ೨೯ ಮುಟ್ಟ
- ತಾನೊ: ಚಂಢಿಗಢ (ಮೊಹಾಲಿ ಕ್ಲಬ್)
- ಇವರೊ: ಮೂವ್ಮೆಂಟ್ ಚಾರ್ಟರ್ದ ಬಗೆಟ್ ಚರ್ಚೆ, ಸಹಕಾರಿ ಯೋಜನೆಲು, ಚರ್ಚೆಡ್ ತೋಜಿದ್ ಬತ್ತಿನ ಪಲಿತಾಂಸೊಲೆನ್ ಸದಸ್ಯೆರೆಗ್ ಪಟ್ಟುನೆಕ್ ಸುಲಬ ಆವರ ಒಂಜಿ ಚರ್ಚಾ ಕಾರ್ಯಕ್ರಮ ನಡಪರ ಉಂಡು. ಚಳುವಳಿ ಚಾರ್ಟರ್ದ ಬಗೆಟ್ ಚರ್ಚೆ ಮಲ್ಪೆರೆ ಬೊಕ್ಕ ಅನುಬಂಧೊಲೆನ ಭವಿಸ್ಯೊದ ಯೋಜನೆದ ಚರ್ಚೆಲೆನ್ ನಡಪಾಯೆರೆ ಒಂಜಿ ವೇದಿಕೆನ್ ಈ ಲೇಸ್ ಒದಗಿಸವುಂಡು.
ಕಾರ್ಯಕ್ರಮ
| ಪೊರ್ತು | ಕಾಲ | ಕಾರ್ಯಕಲಾಪೊದ ಪಟ್ಟಿ |
|---|---|---|
| ಸುರುತ್ತ ದಿನ | ||
| 9:00 am – 11:00 am | ಸುರುಟು ಮೂವ್ಮೆಂಟ್ ಚಾರ್ಟರ್ದ ಸಮೀಕ್ಷೆ ಬುಕ್ಕ ಅಭಿಪ್ರಾಯೊ | ಸಬೆತ್ತ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಅಬಿಪ್ರಾಯೊ- BoTs, WMDE, CEE ನಕ್ಲೆಡ್ದ್ ಅಭಿಪ್ರಾಯ ಪನ್ಪುನ SWAN: ಪವನ್ (ಸಿಐಎಸ್-ಎ೨ಕೆ) |
| 11:30 am – 1:00 pm | SESSION: Movement Charter: Review & Feedback- II | Community engagement – Shreya and Aafi MC Special Community Call preparation – Iflaq and Manavpreet Kaur |
| 2:00 pm – 7:00 pm | SESSION: Impact plan for Indian affiliates/ communities | Hub Conversation – Suyash Dwivedi & Manavpreet Kaur Tech Coucil – Nivas & Jay Prakash Forming a task force- Strategy: Nivas (CIS-A2K) & Nitesh (CIS-A2K) Special Open Community Call : MC Ambassdors (Iflaq, Sandeep Kaur, Chinmayee Mishra, Bharatesha, Aafi and others) |
| Day 2 | ||
| 09:00 am – 11:00 am | Movement Charter: Community Feedback – Tanveer Hasan (CIS) | To discuss & draft overall feedback from Indian MC Ambassadors to the Movement Charter |
| 11:15 am – 12:30 pm | Community Engagement: Action Plan & Closing Remarks | Community Engagement: Action Plan : Nivas & Nitesh Closing Remarks : Tanveer (CIS) |
Report
This report contains the overall key points of the discussion and feedback from the participants or Indian Community representatives.
India Strategic Meet in Chandigarh, 28-29 June 2024
In the city of Chandigarh, sixteen members of the Indian Wikimedia community met on June 28-29, 2024, to discuss the movement charter. This meeting was more than just an exchange of ideas; it was a convergence of passionate voices striving to shape the path forward. The atmosphere was charged with anticipation, reflecting the high stakes of their deliberations.
The outcome of the meeting was that each attendee provided their opinions, which ranged from positive to negative to neutral. Over the course of the two days, our discussions focused on the pros and cons of the Movement Charter and the implementation of tasks for South Asia affiliates in the future. This comprehensive dialogue aimed to ensure that all voices were heard and that a balanced approach could be developed moving forward.
Reasons for Supporting the Charter
- First Step Towards Change
- The charter marks an important first step toward change.
- Volunteer bodies will have the authority to decide on resource distribution.
- Emphasis on decentralising power from centralised entities to volunteers.
- Benefits and Safety
- Ensures safety from harassment for volunteers.
- Maintains volunteer status while providing more opportunities.
- Promotes subsidiarity with decision-making by volunteers.
- Resource allocation will be managed by the community and those familiar with ground realities.
- Acknowledges that while the start may not be perfect, it is a positive step forward.
- Increases visibility of the movement's structure and workflows.
- Engagement, Principles, and Values
- Continuous engagement with strategy is crucial for a futuristic approach.
- The new values proposed by the charter will significantly contribute to the movement's growth.
- The proposed principles and values are appreciated.
- Impact on Volunteers and Governance
- Minimal difference for volunteers in their day-to-day roles.
- Essential changes for evolution and growth.
- Provides fair opportunities to experiment and review modifications.
- Resource distribution managed by the Global Council (GC).
- Conflict resolution becomes a shared responsibility.
- Work and power are distributed, not exclusive to one entity.
- Structured governance and accountability.
- Effective management of resources and workflows.
- Rights, Responsibilities, and Autonomy
- Clear rights and responsibilities are defined.
- Transparent distribution of work power.
- Autonomy for volunteers is emphasized.
- Decentralized resource distribution.
- Decision-making by volunteers for volunteers.
- Clear structure and guidelines for new groups.
- Principles and Values
- Principles and values are well defined.
- The GC as a centralized governance proposal is a good introduction.
- Provides a systematic framework, initiating change with a first step forward.
- Agreement and Support
- Volunteer consensus is that this work should not be redone but rather built upon.
- Executive support with the assumption that gaps will be addressed.
- Shared values and principles are emphasized.
- Subsidiarity and autonomy are central.
- Volunteer empowerment is prioritized.
- Rights and duties are clearly defined.
- Recommendations
- Roles, Responsibilities, and Support Structures
- Clarify and strengthen support structures for better guidance and efficiency.
- Fund Distribution and Pilot Programs
- Provide detailed guidelines for fund allocation.
- Recommend conducting pilot programs with continuous consultation from experts, allied organisations, and the community.
- Address unclear power distribution and collaboration with partners.
- Global Council (GC) and Volunteer Base
- Clarify and improve the structure and formation of the GC.
- Ensure transparent operation of the GC using the community fund.
- Avoid expanding to 100 volunteers due to the current small volunteer base.
- Ensure inclusivity and fair representation, not just by creating seats but by fostering actual participation.
- Challenges and Localised Approach
- Recognize the significant time and effort invested in consensus building.
- Address the gap between the mandate to write a charter and the expectation to create a GC, which lacks organisational support and may reduce impact.
- Acknowledge the heavy workload and management tasks for volunteers.
- Emphasise the need for a localised approach and inclusion of movement partners central to the movement but omitted in the draft.
Reasons for Not Supporting the Charter
- Accountability and Resource Challenges
- The WMF can be more accountable than volunteers.
- Rapid change is resource-intensive and challenging.
- The current structure struggles to keep up with technical advancements; focus should be on technological progress rather than internal restructuring.
- Affiliates face excessive adaptation pressure regarding support structures, which can be avoided.
- Funding remains the biggest challenge. The GC will operate on the community fund, further reducing finances for the community. Dependence on WMF for funding and staff limits the council's operational independence.
- Selection Process and Volunteer Protection
- The GC member selection process via global voting is considered unfair; regional voting is preferred.
- Existing UCoC doesn’t address false legal actions against volunteers.
- Volunteer bodies are less accountable compared to WMF.
- Fear that GC will set unattainable standards for affiliates.
- The roles of partners and allies are not clearly defined.
- The composition of the GC does not reflect the representation it aims to achieve.
- Governance
- Challenges remain in achieving transparency and effective self-governance.
- Implementation Concerns
- Volunteers have a generational gap, affecting their perspectives.
- The community needs recognition as a dynamic movement.
- Implementation of Movement Strategy (MS) initiatives is urgent and important to be completed by 2030.
- There is a lack of support from partner organisations and inadequate resource distribution.
- Affiliates must navigate local laws and policies which are not considered in the draft.
- The draft doesn't account for external factors influencing the free knowledge movement.
- Role of movement partner organisations is not recognised and taken into account while defining entities.
- Draft and Structure Issues
- Many statements in the draft need further clarification.
- Expanding to a 100-member council could create issues with consensus and timelines.
- Making a volunteer group accountable presents challenges.
- Subsidiarity is appreciated.
- Some other Concerns
- The Movement Charter (MC) Ambassador process and dissemination of the MC idea to communities were challenged by constrained timelines and resources. The GC should improve on this.
- The MC's emphasis on self-organisation is not reflected in the voting process. Two major movement entities have been missed due to their definition.
- Principles of equity, inclusivity, and resilience were not prioritised. Movement organisation definitions do not reflect realities.
- There are marginal decisions in the draft that need refinement.
- The voting process for GC should be modified.
- Focus on technological advancement needs clarity.
- equity will translate to actions requires further explanation.
Consensus and Influence
Reaching a consensus on the charter presented several challenges. Nearly two third of the attending members had supportive opinions towards the charter. The diverse opinions reflect the complexity and significance of the changes proposed. It is essential to acknowledge the value of these differing perspectives as they offer a comprehensive view of the community's needs and concerns. The committee's opinions and decisions can significantly influence the larger audience, as they represent the voices and experiences of the broader community. By addressing the concerns and recommendations presented, the charter can be refined to better meet the community's needs, fostering a more inclusive and effective movement. The respectful and collaborative approach taken in this meeting underscores the commitment to working together for the betterment of the Wikimedia movement.