위키미디어 재단 커뮤니티 업무 위원회/2021-05-13 오피스 아워

여러분, 안녕하십니까!

TLDR: 이사회의 커뮤니티 업무 위원회(CAC)는 2021년 5월 13일 19:00 UTC(현지 시간 확인)에 첫 오피스 아워를 개최합니다!

이제 더 자세히 살펴보겠습니다:

우리는 무엇을 발표하고 있습니까?

CAC는 현재와 미래의 커뮤니티 관련 노력을 평가, 탐색 및 해결하기 위해 설립된 새로운 이사회 위원회입니다. 위원회 헌장에는 전체 책임이 명시되어 있으며, 처음 3가지가 내년의 우선순위입니다. 위키미디어 운동 커뮤니티와의 더 나은 의사소통을 촉진하려는 노력의 일환으로, 그리고 이사회에 더 많은 가용성을 요청하는 커뮤니티 회원으로부터 받은 피드백을 기반으로 CAC는 첫 번째 오피스 아워를 주최할 것입니다.

언제 어디서?

유튜브를 통해 2021년 5월 13일 19:00 UTC 오피스 아워는 2021년 5월 13일 19:00 UTC에 줌을 통해 진행됩니다. 최소 3명의 이사와 관련 WMF 직원이 참석할 것입니다. 해당 세션은 실시간 스트리밍 및 녹화로 진행되므로, 실시간으로 참여하지 못하는 분들도 나중에 시청하실 수 있습니다.

어떻게 작동하나요?

회의는 60분 동안 진행되며 추가로 30분 동안 "공개 회의실"이 진행됩니다. 처음 60분은 구조화된 Q&A(CAC의 업데이트 및 커뮤니티에서 사전에 보낸 질문을 기반으로 함) 45분으로 나누어집니다. 마지막 15분은 실시간 참여와 함께 '무엇이든 물어보세요' 형식으로 진행됩니다. 우리는 라이브 유튜브, 위키백과 주간 페이스북 그룹, 위키미디어 일반 채팅 텔레그램 그룹 및 메타의 토론 페이지(이 페이지에 대한 것)를 모니터링할 것입니다. 이 구조는 CAC가 이사회가 진행 중인 현안을 커뮤니티에 업데이트할 수 있을 뿐만 아니라 커뮤니티의 의견을 직접 들을 수 있도록 하여 위원회의 향후 작업에 대한 정보를 제공하는 데 도움이 됩니다.

질문으로 의제 설정하기

최대한 효율적으로 진행하기 위해, 그리고 일부 질문에는 WMF 직원의 답변이 필요할 것으로 예상하므로 커뮤니티 회원들이 미리 질문을 보내도록 권장하고 있습니다. 모든 질문은 2021년 5월 7일 금요일(시간대에 상관없이 자정)까지 askcacwikimedia.org로 보내주십시오. 오피스 아워 안건은 접수된 질문과 관련된 주요 주제를 기반으로 진행됩니다. 참석한 이사회의 최종 이름을 포함하여 2021년 5월 12일 Meta에서 이 안건을 공유할 예정입니다.

등록 방법

보안상의 이유로, 특히 줌바밍을 방지하기 위해 사전에 등록한 사람들에게만 회의 직전에 줌 링크를 보낼 것입니다. 등록하려면 이름, 사용자 이름, 소속 및 회의에 연결할 이메일을 명시하여 askcacwikimedia.org로 이메일을 보내십시오. 제목은 "5월 13일 CAC 오피스 아워 등록"이어야 합니다.

참고하세요

• 이사회가 이런 종류의 시도를 하는 것은 이번이 처음입니다. 이것은 실험입니다. 얼마나 많은 사람들이 참석에 관심이 있는지, 시기, 번역 요구 사항 등이 어떻게 진행되는지 살펴보고 그에 따라 향후 회의/형식 변경에 대한 결정을 내릴 것입니다.

• 세션은 보편적 행동 강령에 따라 진행됩니다.

• 보편적으로 차단된 사용자는 방에 들어갈 수 없지만, 라이브 시청 및 실시간 질문 보내기를 통해 참여할 수 있습니다.

이 메시지를 지역/온라인 커뮤니티에 공유하여 널리 알리도록 도와주세요.

샤니 이븐슈타인 시갈로프(CAC 대표)를 최대한 많은 분들과 만나기를 바랍니다. Shani (WMF) (talk) 20:37, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

의제

CAC 오피스 아워 의제. 2021년 5월 13일; 19:00 UTC

• 환영사 및 소개(5분)
• 커뮤니티 업무 위원회 업데이트(40분, "이 시간에는 커뮤니티 업무 위원회 업데이트 및 커뮤니티에서 사전에 보낸 질문이 포함됩니다")
• 실시간 질문 및 답변(15분, "마지막 15분은 실시간 참여와 함께 "무엇이든 물어보세요" 형식으로 진행됩니다.")
• 오픈룸(30분; 라이브 스트리밍 없음, 메모 없음)

예상 참석 이사:

• Shani Evenstein Sigalov
• María Sefidari
• James Heilman
• Esra'a Al Shafei
• Raju Narisetti
• Nataliia Tymkiv

Notes

This is a shortened and cleaned up version of the notes of the office hour. Please check the YouTube recording for all details.

Question 1: Will CAC commit to organising its events across rolling time zones to ensure inclusion and diversity for contributors? And, how will the CAC be more inclusive of languages other than English?

Shani: We agree the CAC should be accessible to multiple time zones and languages. The CAC will make an effort to alternate its events in the future, depending on interest. The CAC is also working on a strategy to be more inclusive to different languages, including making sure that communications are done ahead of time in a variety of languages. Finally, we will be opening an option for live translation. In order to be mindful of resources, we have decided on a minimum of at least 5 people who are requesting live translation and who are committing to being in the room. Finally, a summary of the meeting notes will be shared online and translated into a few main languages.

Mayur: Movement Communications is a new team in the Foundation - if we were a Wikipedia article we would be a stub. We need to work with everyone to help improve it. Some of the objectives for the team are:

• supporting equity and ensuring accessibility (e.g. language, time zones),
• thinking about ways to engage the movement and create 2-way dialogue.

Hope is to have multilingual staff across time zones - closer to the communities, scaling our connection with communities. Another small flavour of things to come is communicating with everyone in the movement in a more accessible way about the Foundation’s plans for next year through short videos - with translations in many languages - and office hours such as this.

Some of these ideas are coming from the focus groups that convened earlier this year and there is a plan to share some of the findings (research report is already in translation) and due out in a couple of weeks time.(see Movement_communications_insights)

Shani: Thanks Mayur. This is really exciting and I look forward for this strategy to be implemented. I believe it will help improve our communications with the movement right then and there. We want to meet people where they are and will do our best to make that a standard in the way we communicate.

Question 2: The Community Tech team plays a vital role that is essential for community success. What is the plan to scale Community Tech to continue to be able to meet community needs as the movement grows?

Esra: It's great that people appreciate the work that the Community Tech team has done. The team has grown over the years; when we started the team in 2015, it was just three people. Now, there are nine people on the team, including a designer and QA testing engineer. What the team works on is determined by the Wishlist Survey, so if there are vital tools that need support, then let us know on the survey starting in late November. We rely on your input to explore and prioritize these needs.

In addition to the Community Tech team, we've also got the Anti-Harassment Tools team, which has recently been upgrading the checkuser tools and the blocking tools. A new offshoot of this team — Trust & Safety Tools — is going to spin up in July, to work on more projects related to user privacy and safety.

Later this year, we're planning to establish a new Moderator Tools team, with a broad mandate to identify and address the needs of experienced contributors on medium-sized wikis, and help them adapt the tools and processes that the biggest wikis use. We're going to start investigating these user needs soon, so if any of you at the office hours have ideas and suggestions, maybe we could connect them with the product manager. I'm sure it would be helpful to find out what people think the biggest needs are. As mentioned earlier, we are really trying to keep the process open and inclusive of your feedback.

Esra'a: [please see above, no changes]

Question 3: When the endowment is big enough, would you announce to the cultural sector the movement has the funds to guarantee the survival of Wikimedia Commons and Wikisource indefinitely?

When fully funded, the Wikimedia Endowment will allow us to ensure that a portion of the annual operating needs for the Wikimedia projects and mission are supported for generations to come.

Raju: Even though the endowment predates my joining the board, it was created to get past the survival mode of being entirely dependent on us raising money year over year. We have been very good at that, but we may not always be successful in reaching our annual goals. The endowment is also a way we could set some money aside and balance the annual act of seeking money, acting like a cushion. We will never walk away from what we do - annual fundraising - but this is a way to supplement that. When fully funded, a portion of the annual costs and mission can be funded from the endowment.

Other questions (Asked by community via various platforms recently, but not submitted specifically to the office hours)

Why are meeting notes only available from the Audit Committee and not all committees?

María: It is true that there is not a standard practice for publishing committee minutes. There are reasons for this, the committee chairs can determine each year whether the minutes of the meetings are to be published or not. The main reason for not publishing tends to be to ensure freedom in discussion without additional aspect of public communications. We don’t have a great sense of what level of engagement with the Board people want at a given time. We had a Board Q and A at Wikimania where nobody showed up, and the noticeboard on Meta has extremely small participation.

So there is an ongoing effort to be better connected to the communities and there is an effort to get to the heart of the matter and ensure transparency and participation with other ways (e.g. these CAC office hours, the recent pathways process), which help the BoT to interact with the community, show what we are working on and get feedback more directly before making any decisions.

How is the search for a new CEO going? Will it affect strategy?

Raju: There is a lot of interest in the opportunity; Wikimedia's work is seen as high impact and critical in these times.

Lots of intentionality has been placed on connecting with leaders with deep experience in the Global South. Response has been strong in Africa; Asia and South East Asia as well as Latin and South America.

We know WMF is large for a nonprofit; each of the initial leaders who will meet the TC has led within a complex governance and stakeholder (volunteers, chapters, etc.) environment. Each has also been in organizations with global advocacy/policy work; all would have some learning curve on WMF's specific content. There is no perfect candidate.

We are feeling good as a TC group about the range of candidates with expressed interest. Will continue to update community and staff. The initial time-frame of 6 months - concluding in September and October - still stands. This was always going to be a 4-6 months process given the importance of the search and its global nature. About 1.5 months in, it’s going quite well, because there is a lot of interest in the opportunity. Wikimedia is seen as having a high impact, especially these times. Great interest in preliminary conversations. Close to 450 different levels of engagement and conversations have happened. Trying to narrow that down to eventually get to deeper conversations. A lot of intentionality was put in connecting with leaders with rich experience in the “Global South.”

The effect of this search on the strategy - it does and does not affect it. There is a roadmap in place with prioritization, which means that the CEO transition does not change the big picture. For much of the staff moving forward with the strategy is business as usual and it is being taken forward. In other ways, the strategy is never static and we would need to adapt to changes in the environment, but these changes will not be entirely related to this particular transition.

How much did we spend on Movement Strategy? How much did we spend on Brand ´

María: The Board doesn’t get into very granular details since that is the role of WMF leadership. Generally speaking, Movement strategy was 1.6% of the total expenditure of the Foundation since the work launched, and hovering just a bit above 1% the past two years. So, total MS expenses from FY 16/17 to FY 19/20 were $5.21 M (19/20 is projected).

And for Brand the spending has been about $1M over the past few years, plus staff time, that lives within the broader “brand awareness” budget. For the size and global complexity of WMF, these are very reasonable spends.

Maggie: I have come up with my own little catch phrase and I feel like MS is the air we breathe and the water we swim in. Increasingly since i”m part of the APP for the Foundation, I see MS everywhere - like in increased funding for communities - and it will increasingly become more difficult to say we have spent X on it. It’s important to point this out as it will become more difficult as MS is integrated into everything we do.

Raju: From the BoT perspective the MS has been the most important project and the question has always been whether the MS has necessary resourcing to succeed and this will be the perspective also for the future.

What is the progress towards creating a Movement Charter and a Global Council?

Maggie: This is a major commitment by the CR&S team and the Foundation over this quarter and moving into the next FY in July. The initial conversations by the MC drafting committee - hoping for late June, which might be ambitious, but as soon as we can, hoping to have an idea put together and support the committee through a professional consultant on what it means to draft a MC. We hope to have many conversations with the community on representation, ratification, and putting together the Global Council based on its outcome.

Shani: We see a great deal of importance in making sure we do this quickly, but well, and the CAC is there to support that process from the Board’s perspective.

How would the WMF improve cases where a WMF team just fails to answer questions (including refusing to say they won't answer it), even while the project continues? As an example, the IP Masking project has had pending questions of WMF Legal for well over 2 months, but our only point of contact is NOT in that team. (Talk:IP_Editing:_Privacy_Enhancement_and_Abuse_Mitigation#Some_thoughts)

Maggie: I have been working at the Foundation for 10 years starting in a role to improve communications b/w Foundation and staff and this is not always possible as fast and as often as the community wants. We have a whole bunch of facilitators that do that. The lawyers are pretty busy and a lot goes into planning around how or what is asked and when. If a question appears on a Meta page for a lawyer, they may not be able to answer. They may have to analyze the response, go after others, etc. There is a lot of complexity to answering questions and meanwhile they also have contracts to process. It may be that we don’t have the systems in place for people to respond in a timely fashion.

Shani (from chat): We are hoping that the communications strategy will help -- having clear places to submit questions to and knowing who to talk to is part of it. The CAC will also be a venue to raise questions. But agreed we can do better in acknowledging seeing and working on it.

Mayur: Especially the questions of the legal nature might have the issue that it is not possible to answer the question and it is also not possible to publicly state that (because of the legal nature of the questions).

María: Sometimes, legal responses take time and they can’t be super immediate b/c they need to consult. I understand how frustrating it can be. Perhaps because of the time we are in, so I ask for a little bit of grace. There are backlogs and we are coming out of a very difficult year. Two months may sound like a lot, but there is a human aspect, asking for a bit of patience.

Raju: the CAC can become an additional layer of bringing a response back and if something is bottle-necked, we can look into it.

How much have we managed to adapt the strategy in regard to how the pandemic has come to change the way we interact in meetings? Or have we missed addressing that in a systematic manner?

María: Happy to take a stab at it. The pandemic has impacted this a lot. We have been a movement that’s been doing the bulk of strategy work in in-person meetings, so we can discuss faster than in series of emails. And suddenly, we couldn’t travel anymore and we had to meet online, which comes with a lot of challenges. It’s difficult to do many hours in front of a screen, there are time differences. It’s been challenging and we are not the only ones. Something we have been trying to promote is how to have all the voices in the conversations and we don’t miss people. People are less available and time has become an even more scarce commodity, particularly for folks in certain communities. We’ve tried to move forward as much as possible so we didn’t come to a complete halt. Trying to not lose voices and perspectives has been one of our greatest challenges. It also matters that we have been having these conversations exclusively in English - we have tried to provide translations, have documentation out ASAP to make it more accessible. But all of this takes time and time has been scarce.

Raju: Example of some of the challenges, which also explains why some of the answers are getting delayed. WMF is mission-driven and people can work where they want to - this has helped to compete with the tech companies. There are now significant challenges to attract people for the projects related to tech. This also affects a lot of people in a positive way, e.g. a lot of people can join virtual events like Wikimania no longer needing visa and travel arrangements.

James (from chat): Wikimania is going online. All WMF board meetings have been online. Lots of changes. Technology is not as smooth as in person.

Thanking staff and the Board working on the Board elections and thinking about it more creatively. This came up in one of the March meetings – to have support for candidates and potential candidates. Like peer mentorship from Board members or former ones, so people considering running can learn what it’s like. Wondering if current Board members are thinking about this. One of the weaknesses of elections in recent years has been the candidate pool and expanding this pool might solve some of the problems.

Shani (from chat): This needs to be discussed internally. We'll do that and get back to you.

Can we have a visual search on Commons, i.e. what images look like the image put in the search?

James: One way I have addressed this is using Google image search and upload that image to Commons.org and see what image looks like that. Whether or not we should do this internally, i am not a tech person, so not sure how difficult it would be or if there is existing open source software that exists.

My question is about what are the board’s thoughts on salary differences by place of residence of staff and contractors. Raju's point about more companies allowing remote work touches on how this practice might be outdated and hurt the movement. Another issue is this introduces a big bias on who WMF manages to keep. What is the board’s thought on that as remote work becomes more widespread.

Raju: It is not the level of granularity to which the BoT gets to. If there are challenges regarding staffing or retention rates, then the BoT asks how it can support the organization, but generally this is the area of Chief of Talent and Culture and the T&C team. Appreciate the suggestion.