ESEAP Preparatory Council/Meeting Notes/27 November 2023

This page is currently a draft. More information pertaining to this may be available on the talk page.

Translation admins: Normally, drafts should not be marked for translation.

The following document is the meeting minutes taken during a meeting. Please discuss the document on the talk page. With exception for grammatical and other minor corrections, please do not alter the document without seeking consensus from the participants of the meeting on the talk page.

ESEAP Preparatory Council Meeting #3

Date: 27 November 2023
Attendees: Belinda, Reke, Johnny, Agus, Robert, Irvin
Support: Kaarel, Joyce

Agenda

Subcommitee check-in
Feedback on the Movement Charter drafts
ESEAP Preparatory Council in-person meeting
ESEAP Con 2024 Council

Notes

Mapping of issues and concerns that the Hub could encounter during its formation
- Analysis of all the hubs and cross-region collaboratives we can find in the movement
- 3 categories - 1) how they organize?, 2) strategy, agenda, and grants, 3) the meeting for the collaborative.
- Analysing the strategies and planning and grants there are 3 groups that seem to be more established: a) Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), b) Wikimedia Europe, c) WikiFranca for the French speaking world.
- Wikimedia Europe and WikiFranca have a very clear connection. Wikimedia Europe is closely connected with European Union and WikiFranca seems to be more connected to the human rights work.
- The CEE is more focused on providing service to its own region, e.g. technical support and meetings; supporting small language groups to speak up.
- Clarification question regarding the status of the hubs.
- CEE does not have an organization. It has a fiscal sponsor, steering committee, and staff employed through affiliates.
- Wikimedia Europe is an established organization in Brussels, Belgium that does not have affiliate agreement, but has an agreement with the Wikimedia Foundation to use Wikimedia trademarks.
- WikiFranca is an established organization in Geneva, Switzerland and does not have any agreements with the Wikimedia Foundation
- Question for the subcommittee to resolve is defining the value proposition of the hub to its members.
- Another point is to clarify the membership criteria.
- Based on the analysis the ESEAP hub could be similar to the CEE hub. The scope needs to be defined, whether we try to work with as wide scale as CEE hub or should the focus at first be on fewer areas.
- Regarding the events - there are not so many events happening around the hubs. Example is the CEE Spring and WikiFranca is providing microgrants.
- As the ESEAP hub we need to decide what we want to do first. Are we going to hold events directly or will we rather be a resource center for the other groups in the region?
- Suggestion to go with the quick wins, e.g. annual or bi-annual Summit. Also potential to run regional projects.
- There is a problem of fiscal sponsorship, e.g. which affiliate would be the fiscal sponsor, which needs to be established in 2024.
- We need to define the pilot project for the ESEAP. We can do something simple, but comprehensive for all the participating members.
- We have to establish qualifications or criteria of the membership.
- The previous group has suggested that anyone can be a member.
Membership criteria for the hub
- At Wikimania there seemed to be clarity regarding this, but then the questions started to raise. There need to be guidelines, yet the question is how explicit they need to be. Example of people no longer residing in the region. How do we define what makes a member? Maybe we can make affiliates and community groups members? Individuals we have to assess and people can make the case for their membership.
- Suggestion for individuals - are from the region or speak the language of the region or are working on the project in the region. It can also be capacity building, training, etc. The membership should not be diluted, so there needs to be connection.
- It is also possible for people to participate as guests or observers. We can share information about what we are doing also at larger conferences, e.g. Wikimania, etc.
- If someone is from a completely different country and does not speak any of the languages, it is hard to understand why they should be part of the hub.
- Proposal: People living in the ESEAP region, speaking the language, and working on regional projects, understanding the region.
- When ESEAP collaboration started, it was people from the affiliates. Many discussions happened at the Wikimedia Conference in Berlin, which is affiliate conference, so the people who initiated this have been affiliate related.
- It was only at the ESEAP Conference 2018 in Bali, Indonesia, when individuals became part of the conference and regional collaboration discussion.
- Proposal: We should have 2 categories of membership. Representation of recognized affiliate or individual member of a project community in the region.
- Question: What is the setup of the CEE Hub?
  - CEE Hub currently does not have a membership status. They have defined the region they are serving and anyone can apply for support. They have a Steering Committee, which is made up from individuals elected at the regional conference.
- Regional cooperation can have regional definition. Thematic collaboration probably needs to have a different form, example of the education cooperation.
- Regional conference can function as a conversation platform.
- Wikimedia Europe model will likely not work for us.
- We need to decide what kind of acitivities we need to do first, before we decide membership model
- The Hub must not duplicate the efforts of individuals/affiliates. There needs to be coordination.
- The Hub would coordinate region wide activites, that all of the members could partitipate in, so there can be a large impact, in areas such as education,human rights, Wiki loves prograam/campaign. etc.
- Maybe at the beginning we do not exclude many. But need to be aware of "Community spamming".
- Need to be cognisant of individuals.
- Look into other organisations
  - Would we consider NGO's to join the Hub? It's a tricky one, but it would depend on their alignment. They might be able to participate but not have significant decision making.
  - Membership should mostly be from affiliates, if we emphasise just affiliates it causes concerns. When we design the Charter we can set-up sub-committees which different indivudals can join . The core consists of affiliates, but committees accept individuals.
- Question about how many Hubs an affiliate/individual can join. Is there a limit?
  - Might be a matter of having different groups of people running different Hubs.
  - Depends on project, not so much affiliates. Depending on resources and people that are there. Hub is the coordinator. There doesn't need to be a limit.