Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Estratégia/Movimento Wikimedia/2018-20/Transição/Discussão/Grupo A

< Strategy‎ | Wikimedia movement‎ | 2018-20‎ | Transition‎ | Discuss
This page is a translated version of the page Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2018-20/Transition/Discuss/Cluster A and the translation is 20% complete.
Outdated translations are marked like this.
Other languages:

Discussion of priorities: Cluster A - 22. Movement Charter + 23. Interim Global Council + 24. Global Council • Cluster B - 9. Methodology to improve the Wikimedia platform UX + 11. Resources for newcomers • Cluster C - 31-33: Invest in Skills and Leadership Development • Cluster D - 25. Regional & thematic hubs • Cluster E - 2. Funding for underrepresented communities • Cluster F - 3. Increased awareness about the Wikimedia Movement • Cluster G - 8. Align with environmental sustainability initiatives • Cluster H - 36-38: Identify Topics for Impact

Esta página contém um resumo das discussões da Estratégia do Movimento Conversas Globais de 5-6 de Dezembro sobre a implementação das iniciativas: 22. Carta do Movimento + 23. Conselho Global Provisório + 24. Conselho Global. Sinta-se à vontade para continuar a conversa no Meta adicionando suas idéias e comentários na página de discussão.

Participe das Conversas Globais

 
Resumo de uma página das Conversas Globais.

O próximo conjunto de eventos acontecerá no Zoom em 23 de janeiro (10:00 to 14:00 UTC) e 24 de janeiro (17:00 to 14:00 UTC) 21:00 UTC]). Por favor, registre-se através do formulário dedicado do Google, as inscrições serão encerradas em 22 de janeiro.

Além disso, você pode assinar abaixo se desejar expressar que participará da discussão do Conselho Global nos dias 23 e 24 de janeiro!

  1. Nadzik (talk) 23:08, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Cnyirahabihirwe123 (talk) Cnyirahabihirwe123 (talk) 08:49, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Ndahiro derrick Ndahiro derrick (talk) 09:11, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Mrbobax (talk) 12:30, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Christoph Jackel (WMDE) 19:53, 13 January 2021
  6. Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 22:32, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  7. --Yair rand (talk) 23:11, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  8. RexxS (talk) 23:28, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Красныйwanna talk? 00:58, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Nicole Ebber (WMDE) (talk) 14:41, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Shabab Mustafa (talk) 15:36, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  12. حسن محمد ولد ببال (talk) 09:58, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Tgr (talk) 18:40, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  14. User:RebeccaRwanda (talk) 10:30, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  15. DaSupremo (talk) 22:59, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  16. --KlauRau (talk) 03:41, 16 January 2021 (UTC) hopefully - if work permits[reply]
  17. Laurentius (talk) 10:44, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Merterm (talk) 17:54, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Dolphyb (talk) 21:14, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Islahaddow (talk) 07:38, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Saliousoft (talk) 16:23, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Pharos (talk) 18:54, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Douglas --Douglaseru (talk) 02:46, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Kayusyussuf (talk) 07:50, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  25. --Frhdkazan (talk) 17:04, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  26. --Рөстәм Нурыев (talk) 17:08, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  27. TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 19:03, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  28. --VALENTIN NVJ (talk) 19:37, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  29. --Soul Train (talk) 21:56, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  30. - Darwin Ahoy! 15:13, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  31. KevinL (aka L235 · t) 18:11, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Kambai Akau (talk) 18:24, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Alvintegyeka #105.112.116.125 21:08, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  34. --HalanTul (talk) 00:48, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Jadnapac (talk) 04:45, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Mdd (talk) 08:54, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Ilham.nurwansah (talk) 09:20, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Jemima2019 (talk) 09:46, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Jackiekoerner (talk) 11:36, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Yves Madika (talk) 13:46, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  41. *•.¸♡ ℍ𝕒𝕣𝕕𝕒𝕣𝕤𝕙𝕒𝕟 𝔹𝕖𝕟𝕚𝕡𝕒𝕝 ♡¸.•*𝕋𝕒𝕝𝕜 20:15, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  42. --Nanour Garabedian (talk) 21:41, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Abubakar A Gwanki (talk) 23:22, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Nehaoua (talk) 21:56, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Sumit Bishnoi
  46. NanaYawBotar (talk) 16:54, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Jonathan5566 (talk) 03:24, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Kayusyussuf (talk) 11:12, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Ciell (talk) 19:26, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Tochiprecious (talk) 20:46, 11 june 2021 (utc)
  51. Ruby D-Brown (talk) 09:34, 13 June 2021 (UTC) 13 June 2021 UTC[reply]

Resumo de eventos

5 de dezembro

Vídeo resumo da discussão (igual aos pontos escritos, gravados durante os eventos).

Rodada 1

Ações principais (notas completas no Etherpad):

  1. O ponto chave e crucial neste grupo de iniciativas é o Conselho Global Provisório (CIG). Há uma grande carga de trabalho na CIG para elaborar a Carta do movimento, bem como para descobrir como criar o próprio Conselho Global. Poderemos ter de levantar questões como a remuneração (e outros tipos de apoio), que poderão facilitar às pessoas o equilíbrio entre a sua vida pessoal e o seu trabalho na CIG.
  2. Descubra que tipo de pessoas são necessárias no Conselho Provisório: a experiência poderia ser mais importante no Conselho Provisório do que a representação (que é definitivamente importante no Conselho global final)?
  3. Fornecer mais clareza sobre o cronograma, como se não nos perdêssemos em longas discussões.
Vídeo resumo da discussão (igual aos pontos escritos, gravados durante os eventos).

Rodada 2

Ações principais (notas completas no Etherpad):

  1. Fornecer clareza sobre o papel da CIG e sobre o que implicaria ser membro da CIG. Esta clareza também é necessária em relação ao mandato, à relação com outros órgãos do WMF e ao investimento de tempo necessário para os membros.
  2. Encontrar um equilíbrio entre a experiência (externa) necessária para a CIG e a representação (interna) do movimento. Alguns conhecimentos especializados podem não estar disponíveis no movimento, mas especialistas externos podem ter dificuldade em compreender as peculiaridades do movimento Wikimedia. Também é importante evitar qualquer conflito de interesses.
  3. Possibilitar ativamente que pessoas talentosas do movimento participem do Conselho Global Provisório. Isto poderia ser através de apoio prático/logístico, mas também poderia ser através de bolsas para compensar a perda de rendimentos devido ao envolvimento na CIG.

6 de dezembro

Vídeo resumo da discussão (igual aos pontos escritos, gravados durante os eventos).

Rodada 1

Ações principais (notas completas no Etherpad):

  1. Pense na questão-chave deste grupo: Como garantir a equidade e a representação, e como vamos incluir as vozes que neste momento carecem de representação? Além disso, como equilibrar as diferentes estruturas de poder que temos neste momento, tentando não reproduzi-las em qualquer tipo de novo órgão ou na Carta do movimento?
  2. As decisões precisam ser ratificadas nas comunidades. Muitas pessoas disseram que as decisões precisam ser ratificadas “pelas maiorias”, mas a questão permanece: como podemos garantir que haja uma representação equitativa também neste processo de “maioria”? Provavelmente ainda não há uma resposta muito clara.
  3. Necessidade de clareza em torno das atuais alterações nos estatutos por parte do Conselho de Curadores (que é um processo paralelo ao processo estratégico). As mudanças nos estatutos podem entrar em conflito de muitas maneiras com as ideias do conselho global, a carta do movimento e os próximos passos que são necessários aqui.
Vídeo resumo da discussão (igual aos pontos escritos, gravados durante os eventos).

Rodada 2

Ações principais (notas completas no Etherpad)

  1. Como garantir a equidade na representação? Como vamos incluir as vozes que estão faltando?
  2. As decisões precisam ser ratificadas pela maioria: incluindo afiliados, editores, comunidades, etc.
  3. Pause algumas das mudanças no Estatuto até que haja mais clareza na discussão das iniciativas de governança no grupo A.

Entrada detalhada

The rich input from the December Global Conversations, in addition to feedback from other discussions (e.g. WikiCon North America, ESEAP virtual meetings and Advocacy+GLAM meeting) has been further organized by the Support Team into a more coherent template. The objective of this template is to clarify the proposals that have already emerged in the discussions, and to serve as a basis to continue the conversation around the implementation of the Movement Strategy recommendations. The eventual goal is to develop it into a “draft implementation plan” that will be presented to the whole movement and the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees in February 2021. The current template is put forward to serve as the baseline for the upcoming follow-up discussions in January.

The information below has been directly taken from the minutes of the Global Conversations and occasionally edited or rephrased for clarity, so it is not necessarily verbatim.

Defining the scope

Overall
  • Identify key aspects of the body (functions, structure and composition, accountability)
  • Do not call it an Interim Global Council (IGC) to avoid confusion with the scope of the Global Council (GC) itself (maybe: [Governance] Transition Body).
Mandate
  • Clarify the mandate of the IGC
    • It is unclear whether the statements in recommendations on the Global Council should apply to the Interim Global Council.
    • If the IGC is required to fully satisfy the requirements for the GC, we may never get an IGC.
  • Clearly define relation to other movement bodies / committees, including Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) and its Board of Trustees (BoT)
    • Clarify implication of the WMF bylaw changes and governance reform to IGC
Structure
  • Define composition: One council or several functional subcommittees?
    • Drafting the Charter, oversight of strategy and setting up the Global Council are different skill sets and require different capacity, they should thus be executed by different groups.
  • Not sure if the IGC really is the best body to lead implementation
    • It is a temporary body with a focus on MC and GC. Leading implementation needs a different skillset).
    • The movement strategy implementation should be done by all movement entities. This requires funding and coordination, backbone functions.
    • IGC can be the supervisor of the Implementation, not the leading body
Learn from others
  • Learn from others with similar governance bodies (or charters) and not remake things from scratch.

Example models:

Who should be involved?

Overall
  • Define the expectations for IGC members.
    • Experiences or qualities needed
    • Hours of commitment
    • Whether these people can hold other positions in the movement (e.g. AffCom, Affiliate board member, WMF or affiliate staff, Board of Trustees, etc.)
  • This needs to be a working body with committed members.
    • There need to be strong rules to replace members who cannot fulfill the goals of the council.
  • A track record of cooperation and collaboration for membership
Expertise
  • Identify the expertise needed
    • Need for knowledge in governance; not just in the Wikimedia movement (e.g. suggested prior service experience as a board member, either in Wikimedia or in other NGOs, government bodies, etc.)
    • Leadership experience (e.g. directing or advising at least medium-sized organizations).
    • Knowledge regarding Wikimedia movement and its persistent issues within the Wikimedia Movement: Governance, resource sharing, separation of powers.
    • The IGC will require a different set of skills (e.g. community organizing, experience with large-scale on-wiki consensus building) from the execution/governance of the final global council.
  • Some legal and political experience could be useful as well.
  • Some expertise may not be available in the movement, but external experts have a hard time understanding the peculiarities of the WM movement - ensure proper onboarding when working with external experts.
    • Look at other communities in the global knowledge ecosystem and consider them as members.
    • Define clearly the gap to contract for it externally, e.g. for research
  • Balance internal and external expertise, and expertise with representation, avoid conflicting interests.
Representation
  • Make it actively possible for talented people from the movement to take part.
  • Ensure equity and diversity in representation
    • Balance current power structures rather than reproduce them
    • Explore how minorities are included in democratic systems and learn from it
    • Ensure representation for non-affiliates community members, underrepresented groups, newcomers: possibly through quotas.
    • Seat spreading could be needed. As seat-spreading occurs, larger communities increasingly lose voting share, and each editor's vote for representation reduces. These two facets must be weighed extremely carefully.
    • IGC should not require high proficiency in English and should have ample funds for translation and interpretation.
  • A lot of new editors only care about editing and not about the movement’s politics, they need to be given the right incentives to be involved.
    • IGC would need people who are really good at community consultations because no council will ever be fully representative
    • We need to create a process by which feedback can be gathered efficiently (with staff support)
  • Ensure members stand for a Neutral point of view and have no conflict of interest.
  • Proposal: 10-20 ppl, representation from all continents, genders, some staff, some volunteers * a temporary role to hand over to Global Council when they've drafted a movement charter.
    • There may be a link between size of group and time needed to reach consensus/deliver (interim) products. The bigger the group, the more complicated it may become.
    • There’s an urgency: the IGC was planned as though to be set up quickly and with a lot of flexibility. The proposal in the recommendations is not rigid.
  • Suggestion not to make a promise of being representative of movement for IGC.
    • It is the Global Council that is supposed to be diverse and inclusive. The IGC will be tasked to draft an MC with rules that guarantees such an outcome. Expertise in IGC is more important than expertise
Selection method
  • Define the process to set up membership: election, selection, appointment or a combination?
  • The process should avoid public naming and shaming of candidates like some admin appointments.
  • It could be also a cycle of election and selection
  • Step-by-step approach where some members of IGC are elected/selected by trusted members, then others selected after that (perhaps by that group) to achieve diversity and to cover skill areas.

Appointment proposals:

  • There could be some system of community endorsement that gets taken into account, but the main aspect of selection should be a track record of being able to get things done and some experience with meetings and strategic discussions.
  • Have a three person appointing committee for IGC. Allow people to apply for IGC. Appointing committee appoints
  • Set up a selection committee with representatives of e.g. AffCom, FDC, affiliate chairs,  former Roles & Responsibilities WG
  • Any member of the movement can put their name forward as a candidate for appointment
  • Identify who will be responsible for taking the decisions in the appointment, and ensure they are made equitably.
  • Who will set up the selection committee? Maybe  instead of appointing a selection committee, appoint an IGC directly

Election proposals:

  • The Global Council will likely have some kind of democratic election, the Interim Council may not.
  • Elections ensure democratic accountability.
  • Suggestion to have project-wide elections, run locally, each community electing a certain number of representatives
    • MC will not be accepted without complete legitimacy of IGC, which requires elections in perspective of online communities
  • Setting up an election is time consuming and it is difficult to define the rules for an election.
    • Suggestion: Let each community set their own rules for their own elections, using their own processes for deciding rules.

Immediate steps for next 18 months

Interim Global Council
  • Create a clear timeline for the process of establishing the Interim Global Council.
    • The areas of responsibility of a GC all need major discussion, and that doesn't even factor in the time to figure out how to constitute the GC itself.
    • Going too quickly risks delegitimizing the whole thing.
  • Identify the selection method for the IGC members
    • Explore internal and external expertise models for members (e.g. drawing from FDC and Creative Commons models).
  • Clarify the expectations from IGC future members, including: set of actions, time requirement, indicative list of stakeholders they will be dealing with (so they know if their network/experience would be relevant).
    • Identify the hours/week commitment from members.
    • Clarify what IGC members are empowered to do, and how Wikimedia Foundation or the Board of Trustees is empowering them.
  • Request the Board of Trustees to pause the changes on the bylaws to ensure representation on the Board from the community during the Interim Global Council discussions and delegation of responsibilities from the Board.
    • Global Council is NOT a substitute for board representation and governance.
  • Provide independent legal expertise for the community to make governance decisions, as the people involved in this process may not be experts in US laws.
  • Call in other organizations that have experience with issues around governance.
Decision-making / accountability
  • Bridge the accountability gap in the Global Council and its constituencies, which has not been possible in other established bodies.
  • Consider involving experts on accountability or unrepresented communities.
  • Decisions need to be ratified by the majority: affiliates, editors, communities etc.
  • IGC members to regularly connect with their constituencies
  • Decision-making should be about finding the middle ground:
    • A proposal that only can get 51% agreement is clearly not acceptable * anything good on this scale should be easily getting agreement.
    • But ensuring/requiring 100% agreement also creates deadlock.
Movement Charter
  • Creating the Charter is to be on the Interim Global Council’s primary responsibilities.
  • The process of writing the charter may be more important than writing the charter itself.
    • The charter ought to be finally approved by each of local communities, affiliates and the Board through ratification.
    • There needs to be a reasonable process for: 1. changing the proposed charter in the event that community disapproves, and 2. amending the charter in the future in a reasonable process.
    • Example process: 1) take the known ideas and drafts of a Movement Charter, combine them to create an initial draft, 2) try to build support and iterate to get to a more substantial draft, 3) amend the draft with further feedback and input to get to a final draft.
  • Explore external expertise * e.g. external consultants to write the charter according to the goals or framework set up by a volunteer committee
    • The committee would present a draft for discussion based on hard work from the consultants.
  • Define clearly the ratification process of the Movement Charter
    • Define the roles in the ratification (e.g. If the MC has community consensus for something not acceptable to WMF, does WMF have veto?)

Needs for resources and support

  • Define clearly granted support to the IGC.
    • Budget for external consultants (e.g. to interview movement members to gather input for a Movement Charter)
    • Budget for staff to help the IGC oversee implementation of strategy recommendations.
    • Allocated staff to support with organisation (e.g. scheduling meetings, note taking, facilitation, preparation of documents)
  • Ensure proper legal support to the IGC.
    • Note the independent Legal review proposal in the recommendation (Perhaps an affiliate could serve as fiscal sponsor for IGC, and thus fund this position.)
  • Explore support / compensation models for the IGC members, such as stipends.
    • Additional funding for affiliates who will work on it
  • Invest real money into translation services.
    • Volunteer model of translation on meta is not going to be effective for the Interim Global Council and the Global Council.
    • Simultaneous interpretation and translation (languages TBD)
  • Documented lessons learned from FDC, AffCom, Strategy Working Groups, and other community groups so we don't make the same mistakes

Interested communities and affiliates

Based on local, regional, and thematic priorities (please see table and map):

  • WMUK, WMFR, WMDE, DE communities, DE supervisory, WMMA (Morocco), Philippine Community, WMAR (Argentina), UG Senegal, WM Algeria, WM Indonesia, WikiMujeres, AfroCROWD, NYC, Vietnam, Nederland, ESEAP region, the WALRUS, Iberocoop, Arabic-speaking community, wikiBlind

Interested in implementation

Sign below (in whatever capacity or affiliation you like) if you are interested in contributing to the implementation of this cluster:

  1. Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 09:35, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Yair rand (talk) 08:11, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Anupamdutta73 (talk) 07:25, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4. SHISHIR DUA (talk) 10:14, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Pharos (talk) 20:07, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Laurentius (talk) 20:15, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Nehaoua (talk) 21:17, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  8. DrMel (talk) 03:48, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  9. KevinL (aka L235 · t) 03:37, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Transition/Discuss/Cluster_A/pt-br&oldid=26123203"