Primary Wikimedia projects: Esperanto Wikivoyage, Esperanto Wikipedia, Wikidata
Language capabilities (language and level of proficiency): Slovak (sk) - native; Czech (cs) - near-native passively, ~B1 actively; Esperanto (eo) - C1; English (en) - ~B2; Polish (pl) - ~B2 passively, ~B1 actively.
Regional experiences: Central and Eastern Europe and Asia; Latin America and the Caribbeans; Northern and Western Europe
What experience do you have participating on committees, within or outside the Wikimedia movement?
Preparatory Committee for incorporation of WUG Wikimedians of Slovakia (in Wikimedia movement) - I have participated in the late stage by reviewing proposed Bylaws, officially cofounding the formal organization, and coleading the Committee until the first Meeting of General Assembly
Preparatory Committee for next level of WUG Esperanto and Free Knowledge (in Wikimedia movement) - starting and leading the Committee, which resulted in incorporation as a formal organization (getting agreement about the country of incorporation, writing bylaws, formalities of incorporation), leading until the first Meeting of General Assembly
AffCom Investigation Committee (in Wikimedia movement; announced, not yet started) - designing the structure, outcomes and workflow
Committee of the Universal Esperanto Association (outside of Wikimedia movement, the world highest representative of the speakers of the language Esperanto) - it is the highest decision making body of the organization; representation of the organization International Science Esperanto Association (IASE); participation in the discussions and voting on the general direction and policies of the organization
Committee of the World Esperanto Youth Organization (outside of Wikimedia movement, the world highest representative of the young speakers of the language Esperanto) - it is the highest decision making body of the organization; representation of the organizations Slovakian Esperanto Youth (SKEJ) and Esperanto Universal Rock Organization, Collective Communication Association (EUROKKA); participation in the discussions and voting on the general direction and policies of the organization
What skills, experience, or perspective would you bring or contribute to the committee, if appointed?
Potentially my biggest (meta)contribution would be the drive to make the workflow of AffCom as smooth and effective as possible. I really, really want processes to be as effective as possible, so we are using our limited resources (time, effort, energy, attention, money) in a way that creates the biggest movement impact possible. In AffCom it could be manifested e.g. by reviewing the recognition workflow and streamlining it; or making explicit agreements with the Support staff to explicitly notify AffCom in case they see some problems in the processes.
Founding and leading organizations and informal groups:
I have already co-founded 2 formal non-profit organizations (both of them currently recognized as Wikimedia User Groups), and participated in the Executive or Decision-making body of in total 6 non-profit organizations. All of them are seated in Europe, most of them in Slovakia. I am aware that there are a lot of details that very depend on the local (mostly legal and cultural) context which are non-transferable to other countries and political unions. At the same time, I understand that the basic principles of founding and leading organizations are the same and can be very well transferred to new groups seeking recognition as a Wikimedia affiliation.
Bylaw creation and interpretation:
I have already individually written working bylaws for a Wikimedia affiliation; 3 times led the process of bylaw update for a non-profit organization; and 3 times significantly contributed to an bylaw update led by someone else. (about interpretation see the part about Logical and programmer thinking)
Logical and programmer thinking:
I am trained in formal logic and computer programming. That helps me with interpretations of bylaws, agreements and other documents that use logic (e.g. if A than B; in order to C it is needed to D; etc.) and identifying gaps in them (e.g. usual error of not dealing with some possible options, or using unsuitable quantificator). That also helps for clear communication (see below).
Explicit communication:
I tend to communicate explicitly, directly, with clear statements and requirements. I am not pretending that my communication is something else than it really is. That helps me see when someone answers something else than what was explicitly asked. This my capacity would help AffCom to communicate more clearly and efficiently with affiliations and others, as I could (even before AffCom would provide the official answer) help make sure that it answers what was asked. That would help make the reputation of AffCom as a capable movement entity.
Drive for capacity development:
I am a lot into capacity development and also encourage and support others to develop their own capacities. AffCom (as other entities) needs some minimal level of capacities for its work. And I will support appointments of new members who already have such a level of capacities and possibly support development of capacities for members (especially for those whose capacities are not on the minimal required level). This will not only make work of AffCom more smooth and effective internally, but also will improve the experience of (potential) affiliation leaders dealing with AffCom. Significant part of affiliation activists are volunteers, and in my opinion, AffCom should respect their commitment by skillful work.
Orientation to results:
I see a potential future and work to achieve it. In doing so I am willing to do work that I do not want to do - in order to achieve the desired results (e.g. serving in AffCom in order to make the Wikimedia affiliation system working effectively; solving conflicts in order to make an affiliation trustworthy). From my experience with AffCom from last years, I consider more focus on results to be very needed, and AffCom's avoidance of work just because of focusing on results in my opinion hurted Wikimedia movements several times.
Agreement following:
My perspective on agreements is that when parties agree on something, they should fulfill their promises. If in the meantime some of them get to know that the agreement is causing unnecessary harm or is suboptimal, one should try to change the agreement by all the parties. In the context of AffCom, I strongly support affiliations to follow their bylaws, laws, affiliation agreements and other agreements, and I support AffCom to follow its agreements, e.g. WMF Guiding principles.
Evolutionary perspective:
As an amateur student of developmental psychology (I am most proficient in the model Spiral dynamics) and integral theory I understand that perceptions, thinking, emoting and generally living of humans vary depending on many factors. Because of that e.g. the way of doing things in one country would be absolutely impossible in another country. WM movement and AffCom must take this into account while supporting affiliations. Also, it is very useful for capacity development.
Is there any other pertinent information that you would like us to take into account when reviewing your application?
Based on my experience with AffCom during last years, I have announced my intention to start an AffCom Investigation targeting to evaluate if AffCom has been and is fully aligned with WMF Guiding principles. If I would be appointed to AffCom, I would seek to transfer leadership of AffCom Investigation to some other skilled and committed activist. During my serving in AffCom, I would only advise the AffCom Investigation Committee on the investigation process and provide data that I was aware of before joining AffCom.
Which sub-committee are you interested in working with (Conflict Intervention, Recognitions)? Recognitions sub-committee
What do you think are the benefits and responsibilities of functioning as formal affiliates, and when is a group of Wikimedians ready to form an affiliate?
Benefits:
Elevated status, which is (in some cultures) useful for starting collaboration and involvement of activists. Simplified way to use Wikimedia trademarks and get Wikimedia grants. Invitation to Wikimedia Summit to help shape the future of the WM movement.
Responsibilities:
Mostly described in the affiliation agreement. Basically, working in their geographical / thematic area on supporting the Wikimedia movement with the activists and entities that are hard to reach for WMF. Preserving and improving Wikimedia's reputation. Formally, mostly reporting, working under WMF Guiding principles.
When ready:
When at least a minimal number of Wikimedians agree to work together under the same (semi)organizational roof, according to their eventual affiliation agreement. These Wikimedians have to understand and accept that work under affiliation roof is different from work in Wikimedia projects or under non-affiliation roof. They have to have developed capacities for fulfilling their affiliation responsibilities or at least be committed to developing those capacities.
Please describe your experience working with conflict resolution, and how you have helped build consensus and support diversity.
My biggest experience with conflict resolution is helping people to be knowledgeable. That way, their knowledge is not in conflict with generally accepted knowledge and so they are not (so much) in conflict with reality. This is a big part of my work in the Wikimedia movement. Beside that, most of my conflict resolution work is focused on building the structural blocks that create societies that are less conflicting (e.g. building positive peace, which later leads to negative peace (the "usual" peace); supporting whole personality education, that later leads to wider circle of compassion; or supporting effective processes, that later help people to function more honestly). Occasionally, quite rarely, I help people to resolve their intrapersonal conflicts, e.g. by helping them to align with their higher Self, or by helping them to integrate their conflicting parts of personality.
When conflicting parties are capable of being reasonably objective and collaborative during conflict, I can reasonably well help them to solve it by presenting their point of views or knowledge in other way, basically integrating their experiences into a functional superior whole, or by pointing out holes in their reasoning and helping them to understand it better.
That way I am helping to build consensus. I help support diversity in conflicts mostly by trying to help parties to see the situation the most possibly objectively (usually all parties are at least a bit unobjective, so more objective view ads diversity).
The problem starts when some of the conflicting parties are lying, consciously violating agreements, being uncollaborative, avoiding clear truth, being emotional to the point of losing their objective thinking, being too self-protective etc. In such cases, I have experienced the most horrible interpersonal conflicts.
Strong support -- KuboF is a well-known Wikimedian in the Esperanto Community and experienced in the administration of diverse projects, including projects related to Free Knowledge and Language Diversity. Sahaquiel9102 (talk) 16:33, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support -- KuboF respondecas pri la grupo de Vikipediistoj en Esperanto dum multaj jaroj kaj mi certas, ke li faros bonegan laboron por la bono de la komunumo kaj la Vikimedia Fondaĵo.--Ceancata (talk) 17:45, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support --KuboF work supporting Wikimedia is know in the Esperanto community thanks to the many actitives he has organized online and on-site. I have learned from him many things about Wikimedia and seen him being a key supporter and dissemination actor in regard of Wikimedia. Fydus (talk) 20:32, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support -- I have known KuboF for many years and always found him very active, committed, highly intelligent and resourceful --Mateno (talk) 08:17, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose --Jetam2 (talk) 19:41, 13 November 2023 (UTC) KuboF might be good at organizing at energizing the Esperanto community, however, in the Slovak community, his actions are more controversial. While I do not wish to re-open all the old stuff, I think a point about it needs to be made. KuboF and Wikimedians of Slovakia (WMSK) were once in conflict. There was intense work with the AffCom (whom I thank for their efforts) and conclusions and closures have been made. However, KuboF does not seem to be willing to accept the outcome. He continues/d asking people connected and remotely connected to the issue to reconsider, re-reconsider and re-re-reconsider his views, such as in this example. He further keeps styling himself as some kind of special advisor to both WMSK and AffCom. I cannot speak for AffCom but he does not advise WMSK in any way. I appreciate the last point he makes in the statement above, but I wish for a bit of self-reflection.--Jetam2 (talk) 19:41, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's good to see the enthusiasm of someone who wants to make things better. However, I am afraid that the candidate might be disappointed when he penetrates into the secrets of AffCom. I know from my own experience in similar organizations that some processes work the way they do on purpose, but you cannot explain it to the public. I believe, however, that KuboF, as a professional Wikimedian, will withstand the eventual impact of reality and will be able to adapt in such a way as to benefit the committee and the entire Wikimedia movement. Juandev (talk) 00:33, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support я заочно знаком с Хромославом много лет по его деятельности в эсперанто-движении и вики-движении. Несмотря на несколько спорных моментов в вики-деятельности, я считаю, что он может успешно реализовывать свои заявления. Особенно мне импонирует его манера быть тем, кто он есть: он не старается всем понравиться. Считаю, что это очень важно. --VladimirPF (talk) 14:24, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I do not know you at all. But I do not think the approach you are following with the other potential colleagues on this page is the right one. Anthere (talk) 18:21, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support. I have always been motivated by the work of KuboF for Esperanto. Despite the disputes I witnessed when I was an AffCom member, KuboF has a quality that many Wikimedia contributors do not. He is honest and straightforward. I know that this does not fit well with working with a community. But, this is what is needed to solve multiple issues at AffCom through very painful resolutions. --Csisc (talk) 15:13, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose Judging by his previus activitiy on SKWiki, as is mentioned directly on the page: he's non-constructive, problematic when he was leading WMSK in the past, made WMSK look untrustworthy, led fake campaigns, etc. He's also spreading lies on his userpage as well, say he's helping WMSK but that's far from the truth. Mentions lies in his last sentences in the applications yet spreads them himself... KormiSK (talk) 18:13, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I strongly oppose the candidacy of someone who goes around opposing other fellow candidates votes in the election. This kind of attitude is not what we need in a potential member of the Affiliation Committee. As a committee member, one should be a good ambassador and work collaboratively with others towards the common good. Therefore, I believe someone who consistently takes a confrontational approach and judging by their controversial work with WMSK in the past isn't fit for the role. Kaizenify (talk) 20:41, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose, I cannot a person that complains on social media about this very process, canvasses votes of their fellow Wikimedians and campaigns heavily and negatively against their opponents on Telegram and other media. Nadzik (talk) 11:31, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support He's been doing a wonderful job with Esperanto projects' activities, both online and offline, and would be great to have him sharing these experiences with Affiliations Committee. CasteloBrancomsg14:53, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support --Stefangrotz (talk) 16:30, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Remux - Nunca Olvidaré, que me enamoré de la más hermosa flor. Ĉu mi povas helpi vin iel? 18:46, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Strong oppose --Jetam2 (talk) 19:41, 13 November 2023 (UTC) KuboF might be good at organizing at energizing the Esperanto community, however, in the Slovak community, his actions are more controversial. While I do not wish to re-open all the old stuff, I think a point about it needs to be made. KuboF and Wikimedians of Slovakia (WMSK) were once in conflict. There was intense work with the AffCom (whom I thank for their efforts) and conclusions and closures have been made. However, KuboF does not seem to be willing to accept the outcome. He continues/d asking people connected and remotely connected to the issue to reconsider, re-reconsider and re-re-reconsider his views, such as in this example. He further keeps styling himself as some kind of special advisor to both WMSK and AffCom. I cannot speak for AffCom but he does not advise WMSK in any way. I appreciate the last point he makes in the statement above, but I wish for a bit of self-reflection.--Jetam2 (talk) 19:41, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Support It's good to see the enthusiasm of someone who wants to make things better. However, I am afraid that the candidate might be disappointed when he penetrates into the secrets of AffCom. I know from my own experience in similar organizations that some processes work the way they do on purpose, but you cannot explain it to the public. I believe, however, that KuboF, as a professional Wikimedian, will withstand the eventual impact of reality and will be able to adapt in such a way as to benefit the committee and the entire Wikimedia movement. Juandev (talk) 00:33, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose because he's being a jerk on this page. People who are likely to be successful at committee work – people who know How to Win Friends and Influence People – do not vote against almost all of the other candidates, on the flimsy grounds that they have not answered a question that he 
