| Account
|
lara3030 (talk • meta edits • global user summary • CA)
|
| Candidate details
|
- Languages: EN, RU
- Region: ESEAP
- Active wikis:
- Wikimedian since: 2011
|
| Selected home wiki
|
{{{home wiki}}}
|
| Type of seat (regional; community-at-large; or both) (division of regional seats)
|
ESEAP community-at-large seat
|
| Candidate Introduction
|
| Introductory statement / Application summary (maximum 200 words): Why are you running for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee? What would you contribute?
|
I was surprised to find out that someone else's opinion in an article or event that they have not experienced themselves is of a higher magnitude than my opinion, being in the center of the event myself and having all the first-hand experiences of the event. My contribution to the Coordinating Committee would be to make sure this situation does not happen again and the freedom of speech is universally preserved.
|
| Please describe your Wikimedia experience (such as contributions to the Wikimedia projects, memberships in Wikimedia organizations or affiliates, experience working on conduct issues in your community, activities as a Wikimedia movement organizer, or participation in building Wikimedia policies).
|
I have not had a chance to participate yet.
|
| Professional Experience, Skills and Education
|
| Please briefly describe 3 situations that show how you worked on, or advised others on, a complex conduct or policy issue. How did you work with others to address the situations?
|
In my previous work environment (corporate environment of the US based company) out diverse team of professionals faced a situation with out employer introducing a new policy of working from abroad that appeared to be acceptable for some, but discriminatory for others. I voiced my direct and honest opinion about this new policy being discriminatory towards some of my team members, however as this US based corporation did not have a equivalent of the Coordinating Committee or any freedom of speech, this situation remained unresolved until now. This situation has resulted into the mass exodus of some great professionals and knowledgeable people who did not agree with the policy and at the same time, did not see any avenue to influence it.
|
| Leadership Experience
|
| Can you describe a policy, on wiki or off, that you helped to create or change? What did you learn from this experience?
|
From my previous unsuccessful experience of trying to change a discriminatory policy that was imposed by the US team on the rest of the world in my employer, I learnt that having a decent mechanism is key to ensure success of the next step. I learnt that having a Coordinating Committee is one preferred mechanism to make sure diverse opinions are heard in a non-adversarial way and a meaningful outcome could be achieved to benefit all.
|
| How have you been able to empower people to make their voices heard?
|
Yes, in my multinational team every voice was heard and I listened to people. I had to come up with the outcomes that I don't personally 100% align or agree with and this is part of the process that delivers trust.
|
| Sometimes in professional situations, there are personality conflicts. Explain how you remain productive even with personality conflicts.
|
Ultimately, there is nothing to be in conflict about. Having an opinion and voicing an opinion should be encouraged. Impose nothing on others. State neutral facts, if the facts are not to be obtained or the witnesses have not been found - these parts should be omitted as unverified until otherwise is confirmed. If opinion of young and more capable generation is important, the criteria of minimum contributions and tenure within Wikimedia would probably need to be dropped. Opening the floor to everyone could lead to better opportunities of all voices to be heard and remove unnecessary thresholds of having minimum "xyz" published that not everyone could have met in their life.
|
| Strategic Thinking
|
| In your opinion, how can the U4C be a positive influence in the Wikimedia movement?
|
I think that this small step can become more impactful and can quickly grow outside of the boundaries of just Wikimedia. It is possible that the positive outcome could not be achieved, as the entry criteria at this stage already implies longer tenures of people with Wikimedia and therefore could probably skew the representation towards the same age group, evaporate the true diversity of opinions and views. The end result could lead to the U4C that works for some, but not the most, and therefore adoption of the final outcome could be hampered.
|
| How would you help the Universal Code of Conduct develop and improve over time?
|
Nothing is set in stone. Regular "Reality checks" and a proper avenue to suggest , discuss and agree on adjustments should be a good starting point, through there may be more mechanisms unlocked as we go. It is also possible that the future discoveries would be made about the true nature of the U4C initiative of actually limiting free speech even more, then the expected outcome is probably pointing to decline of the Wikimedia trust levels and usage.
|
