Talk:Movement Charter/Drafting Committee/Archived

==Timeline==

What is happening until August 2? Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 15:21, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Dear Ad, thank you for the question!

Over the course of the next 10 days we will be collecting feedback regarding this draft and making necessary changes based on the suggestions received. We have tried to converge different viewpoints presented in previous discussions and hope there is not a need for substantial changes. In this anticipation we are looking forward to launching the call for candidates on August 2, 2021.

I hope this clarifies the timeline. I am available for any further specifications! --KVaidla (WMF) (talk) 15:47, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Questions?

Would it be worth generating a centralised list of questions, or are we planning on individual questions (a la en-wiki ARBCOM)? If so, then that could feasibly start during this time/call for candidates Nosebagbear (talk) 21:52, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Acceptance of the Committee

Hello, to have acceptance for the movement charter draft everybody should have the chance to publish a draft for a topic mentioned in the charter without being part of the drafting committee. I think that discussion at talk pages is important and this is the way how the Wikimedia projects work. I dont have a problem if there is additionally a drafting committee. It is important that it is publishing during the year what they worked on and shares some links so that also the other community members can understand how the result draft was made and learn from other organizations.--Hogü-456 (talk) 19:33, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and updated the description of this committee to make it clear that what it produces will only be a draft, until movement-wide revision and ratification occurs. It's quite possible that seeing the committee's draft the community will decide to accept it, reject it, or replace it entirely - but until that happens, the only thing that the committee can produce is a draft. TomDotGov (talk) 12:28, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Postpone?

The Board elections were postponed by two weeks due to technical difficulties with SecurePoll. Under the previous schedule, there would have been a decent-length gap between the end of the Board elections and the end of nominations for the Drafting Committee, potentially allowing those unsuccessful candidates from the Board elections to also apply for the Committee. With the postponement of the Board elections, that is no longer the case, IIUC. Should the MC Drafting Committee elections be similarly postponed? --Yair rand (talk) 23:19, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@Yair rand: This is a fair point, thank for flagging it. We're considering this and will probably announce any changes in the timeline soon. Kindly keep an eye on the news section for Movement Strategy, and I'll also make sure to ping you in case there's anything new --Abbad (WMF) (talk) 10:23, 11 August 2021 (UTC).

450/400 words query

I just trimmed my statement to 400 words, because that's what the tables were being tagged with, but in the wikitext notes it gives 450 words. Could this be clarified either way? Nosebagbear (talk) 00:50, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

@Nosebagbear: My bad, I changed it in the template but not in the preload page. It's now fixed. Although it was initially set at 450 words, the limit was indeed reduced to 400 words since no candidates had longer statements at the time and 450 was considered a bit too long. Apologies for the inconvenience it has caused --Abbad (WMF) (talk) 10:19, 11 August 2021 (UTC).

"Candidates for this position must submit proof of identity and evidence of age of majority as a condition of candidacy."

Which age of majority applies? Syrcro (talk) 10:06, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

@Syrcro: It would be the legal age that applies in the country/state/location where they are based --Abbad (WMF) (talk) 14:19, 11 August 2021 (UTC).

Thank you, I have also added your answer to the page as a footnote. Syrcro (talk) 08:31, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Is at September 14 UTC or AoE?

Is last day in UTC or AoE? ✍️ Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 15:41, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Right answer is AoE. ✍️ Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 20:47, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Why are the candidate requirements so strict?

Why are the candidate requirements so strict?

Will this group be handling private information? And what does "age of majority" have to do with one's ability to draft a document?

With sincere respect, this comes across as "because we can" and "because we only want people of a certain 'type' to apply"

This just feels like everything related to WMF is starting to just automatically require things whether they are necessary or not.

Please clarify. - Jc37 (talk) 20:04, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@Jc37: [Firstly: major disclosure as someone who not merely does meet those requirements but is an actual candidate]. I'd have liked to have someone else answer it, but hope at least this attempt is useful. In general I'd say it's pretty odd that the MCDC would need to have access to private information. However, though the phrasing we got into the base document does stress openness probably more than any other Wikimedia committee formed, it's possible they could reasonable decide to limit it to some degree without striving for being monomaniacal. One example might be that in the run-up to the final draft being published, to avoid individual members getting hit by leaks (or worse, inaccurate leaks), an NDA might limit there. Still, it is somewhat odd without reasoning. I disagree a bit more with you on "because we only want people of a certain 'type' to apply" - age of majority is the odd phrasing used to indicate that in different countries there are different requirements for signing contracts and so on. By striking the language requirement for the first time ever, the breadth for encouraged application is multiple times larger than any other committee before. In both of these facets there may be a component of the offsetting budget - but I don't know! If I find out I'll let you know. Nosebagbear (talk) 19:18, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Nosebagbear - Ok, you've confused me. I'm not sure why contracts or NDAs need to be involved with simply drafting a document. How is this different than any other collaborative discussion? I can understand if the legal team needs to sign off on the final product, or even be available to answer questions along the way. But nothing I'm seeing here would seem to rise to the level of security beyond making an account. - Jc37 (talk) 00:11, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Re: Be able to attend and take part in online meetings

This requirement is unclear. Requiring candidates to agree to participate in meetings which require the usage of proprietary software would discriminate against people who believe in one of the core tenets of the Wikimedia projects, free software. Nemo 08:01, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

@Nemo bis: Thank you for raising this concern. Online meetings do not necessarily need to happen through software that is not free (for example, I've attended dozens of Wikimedia meetings on Jitsi). I'm sure that the Drafting Committee members will have a voice in choosing the software they use to meet: That, however, would be a group decision based on their own choices and on any logistical or similar requirements, and it's not possible to predict what it will be beforehand --Abbad (WMF) (talk) 17:06, 14 September 2021 (UTC).

Questions & Answers on Movement Charter Drafting Committee Election

Hello,
as you know the Election for the Movement Charter Drafting Committee will start on Monday. We will offer two time slots for Questions & Answer around it; the second one is actually Maggie's conversation time, where those questions fit as well :)

• Tuesday, October 12, 19:00 UTC, on Google Meet
• Thursday, October 14, 13:00 UTC, on Zoom (that’s the Conversation Time with Maggie Dennis)

Please write a short message to answers wikimedia.org if you want to participate in one of these.

Best regards, --Cornelius Kibelka (WMF) (talk to me) 14:12, 8 October 2021 (UTC)