[
{
"title": {
"en": "Decentralization & Self-Management",
"de": "Dezentralisierung und Selbstverwaltung",
"ar": "Decentralization & Self-Management",
"es": "Descentralización y autogestión",
"it": "Decentramento e autogestione",
"id": "Desentralisasi & Manajemen Mandiri",
"pt": "Descentralização e autogestão",
"pl": "Decentralizacja i samozarządzanie"
},
"statement": {
"en": "1: The Movement Charter should be based on the principle of decentralization and self-management",
"de": "1: Die Movement-Charta sollte auf den Prinzipien der Dezentralisierung und Selbstverwaltung basieren.",
"ar": "1: يجب صياغة ميثاق الحركة بناءً على مبدأ اللامركزية والاستقلالية أو الاعتماد على الذات.",
"es": "1: La Carta del Movimiento debe basarse en el principio de descentralización y autogestión",
"it": "1: La Carta del Movimento dovrebbe essere basata sul principio del decentramento e dell'autogestione",
"id": "1: Piagam Gerakan harus berdasarkan prinsip desentralisasi dan manajemen yang mandiri.",
"pt": "1: A Carta do Movimento deve estar baseada no princípio de descentralização e autogestão",
"pl": "1: Movement Charter powinien zostać oparty na zasadzie decentralizacji i samozarządzania"
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Radical decentralization is at the core of the success of Wikipedia. Radical decentralization should be applied to the organizational side of our movement as well."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The principle of decentralization will definitely encourage communities to make appropriate decisions and will support them to enthusiastically participate in the development of knowledge"
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Equity and diversity at global scale require decentralisation and self-management of the Movement. Self-managing distributed networks are a cornerstone of Wikipedias and their sister projects, also allowing creativity and a local, relevant work by multiple affiliates and other local groups. Healthy and robust Movement requires diversity of ideas, organizations and individuals, serving needs of their audiences, authors and allies."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The whole point of the Movement Charter is to help us better decentralize and self-manage"
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is important for the communities who wish to, to have self-management, and to be able to make decisions based on their local context and needs."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Foundation should operate as decentralised way and the Headquarter (with s/elected staff/members from around the world) to co-ordinate and harmonize the system."
}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Decentralisation is one of the most important thing in a environment where there are a lot people to manage as well as a lot of process going on. It helps moving fast quickly."
}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We need a more local approach than we have now: the bigger the movement is getting, the less flexible this global movement will be. By creating local hubs this can be solved."
}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The charter should help operationalise all principles of the movement strategy. Contextualisation is more important than 'decentralisation'. 'Subsidiarity' is also key."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I think it is favorable that the Charter of the Movement must be based on the principle of decentralization and self-management in order to make all members work in the four (4) corners of the world"
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Decentralization makes work completion faster"
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This charter must be decentralized to allow a maximum of content and allow wikimedia to be more accessible and represented in the world"
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "Some projects have seen them unable to self-management of its crisis. And self-management in the many Wikimedia project made broken the community itself."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should be an instance for decentering powers in the movement and for carrying out at its core a compromise with equity in its processes. It should be independent, although accountable, transparent and connected to different stakeholders in the movement - especially those who usually aren't heard."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Just like it has always been"
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The movement must be able to manage itself with as little intervention as possible."
}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We are in a movement of diversities, diversities which each have particular experiences and totally different from each other in their commitments. At the same time, decentralization is a favorable means for the development of the movement and its expansion."
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This should be true, but with certain constraints (like adherence to things like the UCoC, principles like openness and reusability, support for small projects)"
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Without decentralization, we become co-opted and we die. Governments and violent mobs can stop an organization but they can't stop an idea. If Wikimedia is a movement of aligned actors rather than a single large corporation we will survive almost anything that comes our way."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Generally supportive. But there are many cases when the self-managemnt of the communities is abused and malfunctioned, and these cases should be addressed seriously."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "so that the draft can be easily accessible to the people"
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "That's the heart and soul of the recommendations and principles and must be the heart and soul of the charter, too."
}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Support Decentralization & self management with some oversight"
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I strongly support this, its high time that the foundation begins operating in a way that is highly decentralized as compared to the partial current operations that seem to be decentralized to some degree and highly centralized."
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I would like some resources to be aggregated where more communities can use them, but any actual *power* should, and likely would, be decentralised by the MC unless the communities genuinely feel otherwise"
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should preserve the autonomy of communities and affiliates regarding their own governance."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Absolutely, and decentralization should not be a mere buzzword as it has in some of our more abstract strategy discussions. Rather it should be a concrete policy to diversify the community movement, and that includes the relative diminution of the Wikimedia Foundation and the empowerment of volunteer communities through self-management."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I think such a statement or decision will lead eventually to entities that can not work with each other, and they will all lose the thing that connect us together."
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "just because some affiliation can not have the support of the foundation directly ( world and/or geopolitical issues)"
}
},
"risker": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Primary response should be decentralized and self-managed, but there needs to be a way to deal with those out of step with our values. We have seen multiple examples where a third party (committee, WMF, or pressure from global community) has been required to bring problem projects, affiliates, and even contributors into line with global community values, including fiduciary/fiscal ones."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We are a global movement and one single central organization is not capable of adapting to the local culture, law, languages, etc. plus, fostering a decentralized approach reduces risks (depending on how much and what you decentralize) and tend to empower more local communities which usually lead to more engagement at a local level."
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I am a firm believer in communities knowing what's best for them, and the Movement Charter should be reflective of that ethos. Communities should be able to govern themselves, provided that this is within a framework that allows for the broader movement to police community behavior that may run contrary to the principles of the movement as a whole. Strong values beget strong communities, and so we must incentivize behavior that leads to greater empowerment but is also respectful of our values."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "\"Partipants of Wikimedia Movement are from different language abilities and backgrounds, so it is an important task to make people others than English have the ability to communication smoothly with their own mother tounge. Even though English is the de facto working language international and between Wikimedia Movement members, we have to take care of people with mirror languages, though the usage of machine translation tools or professional translater, making them communication with no barriers. My own particpate statement is writen in Taiwanese Hokkien, which is a Sinic language spoken in Taiwan, emphasising the need and importance of equal particpation of different language skills\""
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "While this is good in general, the movement as a whole needs to be able to provide general guidelines as to what the movement is and prevent any part being taken over by supporters of a single point of view."
}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "These are both stated principles of the 2030 strategy."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Absolutely. This is a core part of the Equity in Decision Making recommendation, and comes from the work of the Roles and Responsibilities working group of which I was part. The challenge is how to make it work!"
}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should promote decentralisation and self-management, but this decentralization and self-management can't be used to forget all the other duties the WMF has."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Decentralisation and self-management are very important. A community is in the best position to take a project forward. They should be given more control over decision-making on their projects."
}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "To me, the movement charter should not be the all power and the other contributors outside the charter can share their opinions"
}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"vism": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "There should be some of form of centralisation for standardisation and sticking to core wikimedia ethics and etiquettes. Especially for very small projects where the opinion & biases of a few affect .policies"
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "While each affiliated organization (Chapters, UG...) must have its own governance (according to the needs of that organization) the Movement must be and have a structure that amalgamates these organizations in - and for - the common good."
}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Decentralisation, self-management or autonomy is the core of Wikimedia projects. They're also the motivition of a lot of volunteers, at least for me. Also, I know a lot of volunteers have been more and more worried about the centralisation, which has become a more and more vivid threat. The important thing is to know that, it is much easier to centralise a decentralised project than the opposite way."
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "Openness of the Process",
"de": "Offenheit des Prozesses",
"ar": "Openness of the Process",
"es": "Apertura del proceso",
"it": "Apertura del processo",
"id": "Keterbukaan Proses",
"pt": "Grau de abertura durante o processo",
"pl": "Otwartość procesu"
},
"statement": {
"en": "72: The Movement Charter should be developed in an open, iterative, consultative, participatory and transparent process",
"de": "72: Die Movement-Charta sollte in einem offenen, iterativen, konsultativen, partizipatien und transparenten Prozess entwickelt werden.",
"ar": "72: يجب صياغة ميثاق الحركة بناءً على تشاورات مفتوحة وتشاركية وشفافة.",
"es": "72: La Carta del Movimiento debe elaborarse en un proceso abierto, iterativo, consultivo, participativo y transparente",
"it": "Apertura del processo72: La Carta del Movimento dovrebbe essere sviluppata in un processo aperto, iterativo, consultivo, partecipativo e trasparente",
"id": "72: Piagam Gerakan harus dirumuskan melalui sebuah proses yang terbuka, interaktif, konsultatif, transparan, dan dapat diikuti semua orang.",
"pt": "72: A Carta do Movimento deve ser construída através de um processo aberto, gradual, consultivo, participativo e transparente",
"pl": "72: Movement Charter powinien zostać stworzony w otwartym, iteracyjnym, konsultacyjnym, partycypacyjnym i przejrzystym procesie"
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The reason I proposed this statement is that I do believe this is necessary to gain the trust of communities to ratify the end product."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "These principles are the basis of serious future work, and they reduce conflicts that destroy relationships and efforts"
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Certainly not every individual and group took part in the process, and not every important issue has been taken under consideration. New Wikimedians, groups and ideas will emerge, and our Movement will evolve. Nevertheless, the process needs to proceed, the input gathered so far needs to be treated respectfully, and we need to avoid neverending consultations."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Why not."
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The movement charter will be a key document for our movement in the years to come. I strongly endorse all the descriptions provided in this statement, as everyone should participate (even if only being informed) in this process, from different perspectives."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Any body who has any objection / better idea should be able to speak his/her/their mind without any censorship or fear of negative backlash."
}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes to open and consultative. But I wouldn't want another four year process like the MovStrat we just had. Let's keep the MC process open, but efficient."
}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes the process should model future decision making initiatives in the movement."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should be developed through an open, iterative, consultative, participatory and transparent process for more credibility"
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Openness and transparency clears doubts on decisions taken"
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The participation of several contributors in a transparent way will allow to have a more complete content. Some contributors will be able to enrich a content"
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is air-like, and I think there is not anyone to make it closed."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Deliberative processes in the Wikimedia Movement should be equitative and empowering."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Just like it has always been"
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "These principles are non-negotiable if the movement charter is to function correctly."
}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "No one is supposed to ignore the law. Everyone must not only be informed, but must participate in their own way at the different stages, especially must be involved (by consultations, by proposals, by opinion, ...); Of course, we will not be able to have everyone's support for the resolutions and orientations taken, but it is important that the charter be known."
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "to reach final charter the very nature of the process will need to utilise alternatives as well"
}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The movement charter should reflect the best ideas in the movement as a whole, not the options of the committee members"
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Wikimedia has been around in some form for over 20 years, and hopefully will be around for at least 20 years more. If we rush this project it will be yet another failed community consultation and we will have to try again later in several years. Let's focus on building a consensus throughout Wikimedia."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Because without consultation and participation a good draft cannot be prepared."
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is a movement charter, for the movement, by the movement. So we need to be inclusive of all constituents of the movement, and true to the values of our movement."
}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Ideal way to draft the Charter which is goign to be a functional guideline for the movement."
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I'm very supportive of this, the reason being that , since this charter will act as the suppreme governing body for the movement , this will require equality,transparency and consultation,this will help in getting more communities ,editors and groups ratifying to the charter without hesistations since they will have played a role in the implementation phase."
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The statement gets much right, so just two points to highlight: I feel that MCDC members should propose their own ideas alongside everyone else in the Community if they want them heard and so long as the iterative phases are helping, we shouldn't limit them"
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should promote transparency and accountability to guarantee a healthy governance."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes for the charter to have legitimacy and hence real effectiveness it must be done the wiki way."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The charter itself is a leading step to a new era in the movement, to make it reliable and believable by people it needs to be built openly and with full transparency"
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "above all transparency is very important to motivate the community and affiliates to be more loyal and supportive of the WMF"
}
},
"risker": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "On the whole, this should be reasonably open. However, we *are* selecting 15 people to take on the responsibility here for the entire global community, and the MCDC needs room to work and talk amongst itself."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The more eyeballs the higher the chances to do a great job. One small caveat, those should be the intent and spirit but to be balanced with the need to, on some topic, do a lot of background work so that discussions are informed."
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter has to be developed the same way we've grown our community: through consensus, open partiicpation and radical transparency. Ensuring that it is developed in this manner will not only bestow legitimacy upon the Drafting Committee's work, but will also make it easier for communities to digest the document's contents and approve of the Committee's work when the time comes for ratifying and implementing it."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The gathering and the election of the Movement Charter commitees is an important steps to let everyone who is interested in the Wikimedia Movement to engaged. Any movement to bring more people to involve in the movement is welcomed, and it will be open, iterative, consultative, participatory and transparent in the whole process."
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I support this very much because it is important for members of the Wikimedia movement to choose who is in their best interest. this would ensure a smooth transition process when new candidates are to be elected"
}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is the most important design principle for the Movement Charter process."
}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "These are all core values of the movement and the 2030 strategy."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Definitely agree. I have been advocating for this all year. For instance, here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:The_Land/Movement_Charter_Creation_and_Ratification_Principles"
}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "It should have all of this ideas, but it can't last forever. Every iteration and consultation must be short, and may be too short to have a discussion on every step. Key moments should be as participatory as possible."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The movement charter is very important and will serve as the guiding document for the movement. We must be clear and transparent in its making. We must be open to suggestions and feedback. Without adequate community consultation we will miss out important aspects. Transparency and proper documentation wil help in smooth communication."
}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"vism": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It should be very transparent just as should all other main processes should be. Wikimedia projects runs on the guarantee and trust that everything remains transparent and open. So it should also be open."
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Absolutely. I would like the creation of the Charter to be a process involving many volunteers directly editing numerous Charter drafts around Wikimedia, moving forward in a wiki-style manner, our many communities and groups cross-pollinating texts and ideas and arguments and points of discussion, and gradually converging towards coherent results with the assistance of the drafting committee."
}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The more transparency and participation there is in the constitution of the Movement Charter, the more support we will have from the communities that are part of the Movement, as well as more diversity of opinions that will allow us to be more inclusive."
}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, of course. The important thing, though, is not \"should or not\" but how."
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "Limiting the role of WMF",
"de": "Begrenzung der Rolle der WMF",
"ar": "Limiting the role of WMF",
"es": "Limitación del rol de la WMF",
"it": "Limitazione del ruolo di WMF",
"id": "Membatasi peran WMF",
"pt": "Limitação do papel da WMF",
"pl": "Ograniczenie roli WMF"
},
"statement": {
"en": "#6: The Movement Charter should limit the role of the Wikimedia Foundation to 'keep the servers running' and perform some legal duties, such as guarding the trademarks.",
"de": "6: Die Movement-Charta sollte die Rolle der Wikimedia Foundation alleine auf den Betrieb der Server und rechtliche Verpflichtungen, wie den Markenschutz, beschränken.",
"ar": "6: يجب أن يحصر ميثاق الحركة مسؤوليات مؤسسة ويكيميديا في \"تشغيل الخوادم\" والمهام القانونية الأساسية، مثل حماية علامات مشاريع الويكي التجارية.",
"es": "6: La Carta del Movimiento debería limitar el papel de la Fundación Wikimedia a \"mantener los servidores en funcionamiento\" y realizar algunas tareas legales, como la protección de las marcas registradas.",
"it": "6: La Carta del Movimento dovrebbe limitare il ruolo della Wikimedia Foundation a \"mantenere i server in funzione\" ed eseguire alcuni doveri legali, come la protezione dei marchi",
"id": "6: Piagam Gerakan harus membatasi peran Yayasan Wikimedia untuk \"menjaga berjalannya server\" dan menjalankan beberapa tugas terkait hukum, seperti menjaga merek dagang.",
"pt": "6: A Carta do Movimento deve restringir o papel da Fundação Wikimedia à \"manutenção de servidores\" e realização de algumas funções legais, como proteger suas marcas registradas",
"pl": "6: Movement Charter powinien ograniczyć rolę Wikimedia Foundation do \"spraw technicznych\" oraz działań prawnych (np. ochrona znaków towarowych)"
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The reason I propopsed this statement is that I do believe radical decentralization is even stronger than statement 1. I prefer having a chapter with a small office in every country to a single big organization in San Francisco. That way the movement will be more diverse and far more inclusive. Employment - including current employees - will shift from WMF to decentral organizations."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I do not have a specific opinion, especially in reducing the role of the Foundation in operating servers and other legal and commercial areas. We can talk about that later, when matterss become clearer."
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "\"I don't believe this Charter should explicitly describe and limit the role of the WMF in such detail. Make it brief, clear, and leave room for more detailed arrangements and experiments. Nevertheless, Charter should lead to a more decentralised, equitable Movement, with a larger number of strong entities and with smaller disparities. More decentralisation does not mean San Francisco HQ employing in Los Angeles and Lagos - but it means more, larger partnering organisations, including hubs.\""
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "Even if it happens, it can't right now, what could happen is we can authorize the Global Council to do these sort of things. It's really not the Charter's job to limit it right away."
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I think that the Wikimedia Foundation has other useful roles that are important for our movement. For example, the Foundation helps in many technical developments that cannot always be performed in all contexts, also the Foundation helps in several activities that cannot always be done by all communities (such as communication, conference support, etc.). Not all communities have enough resources to be able to manage all by themselves (but all those who can must be granted this freedom of course)"
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The functions of Wikimedia Foundation should be clearly marked. Their roles must include all the important activities needed to make the organisation the best in the world."
}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "By the task of distributing and allocating budgets on the one side, and also being one of the parties seeking to receive this money in quite a large ammount, the WMF has a dual role. The Global Council should play a role in this by taking over the funds allocation."
}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "We should challenge ourselves to think of a different future, considering carefully the need for any centralised backbone structure. It's not about taking some founctions away from the Foundation and decentralising them, but thinking from scratch what structure would serve Knowledge Equity best."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I am of the opinion with this method because it will allow the wikimedia foundation to unclog its multiple tasks."
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This would reduce bureaucracy in work schedules"
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The marketing of servers is very important for the functioning of wikimedia and also the protection of trademarks to respect intellectual property"
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "In line with the ideological intent of the Foundation."
}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "We have seen a lot of problems when the Foundation does not exist where it should be. The limitations Foundation's role will make our projects closed and unable to make the most extensive diversity for enabling the sum of the knowledge."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Wikimedia Foundation is a major stakeholder in our movement. Though its duty should be more clearly defined, particularly in terms of community actions, its role cannot be limited to servers and juridical matters."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The voice of the community of Wikimedians who creat the content of the projects who happen to be volunteers, should matter most. WMF should only see to it that the projects are working."
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Although the Foundation must limit itself to observing and providing support, it is also the movement's representative to the world."
}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "This change would be in my opinion very sudden, I think that for a start it should not be a priority action. We should therefore think (after a period) of making amendments to the charter and thus certain changes can be made."
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The WMF and staff are not an enemy of the movement, they are there like everyone else to improve the projects. There are many areas which benefit from a centralised structure with employees assigned task implementation who can be accountable for ensuring outcomes that volunteers can manage."
}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I oppose firing 200+ staffers (which is how I read this statement being implemented). WMF provides many essential services to the community beyond these two (like safety and anti-harrassment). While we can shuffle these units between different entities (once they are created), that's just WMF-by-another-name."
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter is an overall framework for the whole Wikimedia movement. Rather than use the Charter to micromanage the Wikimedia Foundation, the Charter should create the mechanisms that determine how much funding, if any, movement-aligned organizations like the Wikimedia Foundation get."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is based on the assumption that the Movement Chapter is always functionally well forever. But this may not be true. We see cases when such a chapter fails. When the chapter fails the movement fails altogether."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "To perform legal duties absolutely can be done."
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Wikimedia Foundation performs many crucial functions for the movement. It will be the job of the drafting committee and the communities to review these and decide which ones should be done by the Wikimedia Foundation and which by other entities, and which should be decentralized."
}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Wikimedia Foundation has been extending a lot of support to various projects & aspects of movement growth. Limiting their work can immediately expose the GC to this workspace with No prior experience and professional support & a lot of work, which can be overwhelming."
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I oppose this, the reason being that the foundation being unlimited to the mentioned ,has successed at it ,therefore limitations provided by the charter may result into repurcussions such as conflict of interest that may affect the whole wikimedia movement."
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "While I do believe that the WMF's remit should be trimmed, and has been subject to overreach, they fulfill multiple critical roles well in excess of those suggested here. Technical development, lobbying, *certain* T&S duties to name just a few."
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should guarantee overview mechanisms and saveguards regarding the role of the Wikimedia Foundation."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "No, for our projects to thrive we need both technological innovation and social development, and we cannot merely rest on our laurels. Much of this work should eventually be decentralized but of course much of it remains for the forseeable future with the Wikimedia Foundation and it's a vital task."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "This will lead to a small dictatorships all around the world, not all communities are mature or experienced in democratic systems. We've noticed some affiliates turned their groups into a complete corrupted entity, the only solution was the interferance of the foundation to replace them or to fix the situation"
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "this question is very difficult to limit the foundation to this. for me it is also necessary to leave other aspects of the management of funds and to share them well with the region according to the needs, and to the collection of funds"
}
},
"risker": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The WMF does a huge number of tasks that make up the necessary infrastructure of both a global movement and a top-10 website. It is beyond the scope of a movement charter to eliminate that infrastructure. The decisions about reallocating those roles should fall on a global council."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Wikimedia Foundation should be answerable to and take direction from the global membership."
}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "\"I cannot support any specific statement on a specific organization when the actual discussions of where we are going did not happen. I agree the role of the Wikimedia Foundation should reviewed and reassed. But it should be done right now. The span of the discussion is wide and complex, and perhaps there also are options where the technical part is not managed by Wikimedia Foundation or the trademarks are managed by a dedicated organization. What I agree with is that the Wikimedia Foundation scope will need to be reviewed through the lense of the discussion we will have."
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I understand that the Wikimedia Foundation doesn't have the most sterling reputation among segments of the community, but it does the movement a great disservice if we only limit the Foundation's work to those two functions. I believe the Foundation can do good non-technical work, especially with advocacy and expanding our reach, but it needs to be more grounded in the reality of its communities, especially in developing countries. Communities can play a big role in making that change happen."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The one who is part of the movement is the key man, promoting open knowledge. The Wikimedia Foundation always make the hardware funcation normally, protecting legal entities from bad actors, and can still do the job they are good at."
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "1. Only the Wikimedia Foundation itself has the power to alter its own role. 2. The Foundation's mission is \"To empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally.\" If the foundation does not do this, who will? 3. Who will undertake the Foundation's fundraising role?"
}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I believe that the Foundation has a broader role to play, and that role - just like the roles of other entities in the Movement - should be defined in the Charter."
}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Charter should not prescribe things at that level of specificity - the drafting committee has neither the expertise nor the time nor the mandate to make such choices. It should instead focus on creating the frameworks by which such decisions could happen in the future."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "There is not currently a consensus about what the future role of the Wikimedia Foundation is to be. So the Movement Charter should not make a strong statement about it. I personally wish to see the WMF adopting a smaller role, but this will evolve over time."
}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Wikimedia Foundation should become in just the opposite, a whole technical structure working for the needs of the Movement, including volunteers and user groups. We need a stronger structure, but with a more decentralised, open and direct management. The lag of processes and tasks we need to improve our projects will need of a greater investment and collective leadership."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "\"Role of Wikimedia Foundation\" ― that itself should have or might have a separate module. The involvement of Wikimedia Foundation should be minimal. Whether it should be limited to only two-things: server-running and legal ― that needs discussions. Over-all the Foundation should work on only those things which a community can not do."
}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"vism": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Wikimedia foundation should also check that there is adequate tech support, no violation of UCoC, prevent power abuse."
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "While the WMF might be placed into this role at some point in the future, I don't think it should be required by the Charter itself. We should be able to adapt to circumstances and allocate responsibilities without this constraint."
}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "WMF should have a more participatory role, beyond the maintenance of servers and brands. Although it should not be the body that decides the governance, it must work hand in hand with the Global Council to keep the Movement going."
}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The limitation may be wider or narrower, but I agree with the direction. This Statement is the \"how\" of the Statement 1."
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "Transparency Requirements",
"de": "Transparenzanforderungen",
"ar": "Transparency Requirements",
"es": "Requisitos de transparencia",
"it": "Requisiti di trasparenza",
"id": "Persyaratan Transparansi",
"pt": "Requisitos de transparência",
"pl": "Wymogi przejrzystości"
},
"statement": {
"en": "18: The Movement Charter should include transparency requirements on the Foundation and affiliates",
"de": "18: Die Movement-Charta sollte Transparenz-Regeln für die Wikimedia Foundation sowie die Wikimedia-Organisationen und -Gruppen umfassen.",
"ar": "18: يجب أن يتضمن ميثاق الحركة بنوداً عن شروط الشفافية لمؤسسة ويكيميديا وللمجموعات والجهات الشقيقة.",
"es": "18: La Carta del Movimiento debe incluir requisitos de transparencia para la Fundación y sus afiliados.",
"it": "18: La Carta del Movimento dovrebbe includere requisiti di trasparenza per la Foundation e gli affiliati",
"id": "18: Piagam Gerakan harus memuat kewajiban transparansi bagi Yayasan Wikimedia dan organisasi mitranya.",
"pt": "18: A Carta do Movimento deve incluir requisitos de transparência para a Fundação e afiliados",
"pl": "18: Movement Charter powinien nakładać wymogi przejrzystości na Wikimedia Foundation oraz na afiliantów"
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I fully support requirements to publish annual reports and audited financial statements, and notes from governing bodies."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Transparency for me is the basis of any meaningful and future work"
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Transparency is a crucial part of implementing the equity in practice. It empowers stakeholders (e.g. editors, members, donors, other affiliated orgs), increases trust and allows better management and learning from each other. It was expected by e.g. the FDC, and should be expected from the WMF and other affiliates."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Absolutely."
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is very important to be transparent about information related specifically to decision making, in order to understand the argumentation behind important decisions. On the other hand, it is understandable that sometimes transparency is not 100% possible (such as when you sign a non disclosure agreement), but posting minutes of meeting shouldn't be that hard either :)"
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "All the parties in the Foundation should have a periodic 360 degree review on its role and relation with others."
}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The WMF should be held to the same standards as affiliates and chapters."
}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "To quote the transparency principle of the 2030 strategy -A transparent culture enables everyone to share in the same strategic direction, builds confidence in our projects, and promotes trust among participants.\" Affiliates are bigger structures and so should have a higher requirement for transparency. However this should be considered together with Equity, and where equity and transparency are in conflict (e.g. privacy of certain groups) equity should prevail."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I agree with this idea because for the smooth running of the charter of the movement, it is important to set the rules and basic principles of operation"
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "When this is done it would make the whole process trustworthy."
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The charter of the movement must require transparency for the reliability and authenticity of the information available in the dictionary"
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We should support transparency, as long as the transparency requirements don't conflict with the enforcement of the Universal Code of Conduct."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Like it has always been"
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "All, without exception, must be measured by the same yardstick."
}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is normal for a movement that claims to be open and that is called upon to be the main player in open data."
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "There will always be cavaets on what can be released for safety, privacy, or legal reasons. In principle transparency is necessary to ensure equity of access"
}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This should be foundational to the movement"
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I generally support transparency and disclosures for the Foundation and affiliates, but I don't think the Movement Charter is the proper venue. This should be a policy that the Global Council pursues."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, absolutely must be made, so that the draft can play an important role in improving and upgrading."
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should include a broad statement on transparency, but the details should be laid out in the movement-wide policies which will be approved by the Global Council."
}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It's good to have the expectations documented"
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "It's not easy for me to oppose"
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Committee must lead from the front on transparency, but I also believe both WMF and affiliates need to work on transparency - not all of it, some parts of the WMF and some affiliates are already doing it well. But having best practices made concrete will help us avoid issues in the future, instead of needing to solve them."
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should promote transparency and accountability to guarantee a healthy governance."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "(This was my own proposal.) Yes, the WMF should fulfill transparency requirements such as explaining the budget of key programs as a matter of course, not information only to be provided as a kind of favor. There should be a commitment also to answering all reasonable information requests. Similar requirements would hold for affiliates as well, with the understanding that many lack a budget, and should have the assistance of centrally funded global staff to bolster their documentation."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The charter itself is a leading step to a new era in the movement, to make it reliable and believable by people it needs to be built openly and with full transparency"
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "some aspects of non-transparency frustrate affiliations and comments"
}
},
"risker": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I think both affiliates and the WMF can be more transparent; how we would write that into the Charter would be negotiable."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I agree in the principle, but everyone would agree. The real question is how do you set up structures to provide checks and balances for everyone in the movement."
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I agree that the Movement Charter should enshrine the idea of transparency as a necessary tenet for our movement to effectively function, but it would be counterproductive for the document to specify the extent of this transparency. The Movement Charter should, in effect, function more like a constitution and less like by-laws which go into excruciating detail as to how our movement ought to function."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Transparency is the key factor of the whole Wikimedia Movement. As part of the movement just like the Foundation and affiliates, I think it is ok to inclued transparency requirements to the Movement Charter."
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This would reduce members taking offense and complaining about how resources are utilised"
}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "While very supportive of transparency, by including \"requirements\" this statement pre-supposes that the Wikimedia Foundation will become subservient to the Movement Charter. 1. I don't know if this is possible. 2. I don't know if this is desirable."
}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Transparency is a core value of the movement and the 2030 strategy, and something the movement has struggled to achieve in the past."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Strongly agree. However such requirements must remain flexible enough to apply in a wide range of contexts."
}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is evident that transparency is one of our strongholds. The movement should promote work in the wiki way, with public decission making and discussion."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Transparency is a vital factor in the movement. The movement charter must encourage measures to ensure transperancy."
}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "There has to be transparency, I think that's the driving engine of Wikimedian Foundation"
}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"vism": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Transparency is the key to trust and health of Wiki sites. It should be maintained"
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "There are two kinds of transparency: The kind where someone routinely comes out of an opaque box and tries to communicate unreservedly what happened inside, and the kind with a transparent box where everyone can just see the events inside. The former is the bare minimum, and we should try to increase the latter where we can. Transparency should be the default; any opacity should require justification. Reports and data publication should be comprehensive, and unjustified overt secrecy prohibited."
}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Transparency is a necessary point for the correct performance of the functions of any organization. And if WMF and CG are to work effectively hand in hand, all processes must be transparent."
}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I agree that transparency is important. But I'm not sure if these requirements should or must be put in the Charter. We don't need a Charter covering everything, do We?"
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "Independence of the Communities",
"de": "Unabhängigkeit der Communitys",
"ar": "Independence of the Communities",
"es": "Independencia de las comunidades",
"it": "Indipendenza delle comunità",
"id": "Kemandirian Masyarakat",
"pt": "Independência das Comunidades",
"pl": "Niezależność wspólnot"
},
"statement": {
"en": "#21c: The Movement Charter should reaffirm the editorial integrity and independence of the editor communities, and the right to self-governance of projects.",
"de": "21c: Die Movement-Charta sollte die redaktionelle Integrität, die Unabhängigkeit der Communities sowie das Recht auf Selbstregulierung der Projekte bestätigen.",
"ar": "21ج: يجب أن يؤكد ميثاق الحركة على استقلالية مجتمع المحررين والمتطوعين، وعلى حقهم في إدارة المشاريع بدون تدخّل.",
"es": "21c: La Carta del Movimiento debe reafirmar la integridad editorial y la independencia de las comunidades de editores, así como el derecho a la autogestión de los proyectos.",
"it": "21c: La Carta del Movimento dovrebbe riaffermare l'integrità editoriale e l'indipendenza delle comunità di volontari e il diritto all'autogoverno dei progetti.",
"id": "21c: Piagam Gerakan harus menegaskan integritas editorial dan independensi komunitas penyunting, serta hak atas tata kelola proyek secara mandiri.",
"pt": "21c: A Carta do Movimento deve reafirmar a integridade editorial e independência das comunidades editoras, e seu direito de autogovernança dos projetos.",
"pl": "21c: Movement Charter powinien potwierdzać redakcyjną uczciwość i niezależność społeczności, a także prawo do samorządności projektów."
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Specification of the rights of volunteer editors have been deemed obvious. This statements enumerates a few of them."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The independence in editing and administrative matters is, to some extent, useful for the development of the encyclopedia, but the presence of general measures and limited monitoring is necessary so that the train does not deviate from its tracks"
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Self-governance and editorial integrity are cornerstones of the Movement. Reasons are plenty, from legal to economic (finansing editorial boards of all the Wikipedias was not possible). Nevertheless, stewardship is needed and affiliates etc. need to provide resources: training (in e.g. conflict resolution), platforms of communication, legal assistance, audit (including state of the integrity, inclusiveness, community health, and quality of particular Wikis) etc."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Absolutely."
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "A very important point in my opinion. The online community should and must be independent in its decisions, without any pressure from any other part, either inside or outside of the movement. The charter should definitely reaffirm this."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Charter will be the benchmark of how the different arms of the organisation will function."
}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The MC should be about our principles and shared values, why do we do what we do. It needs to be specific about where responsibilities lie, and have some general guidance for revenue generation and resource allocation in the movement."
}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I think this statement combines content management and governance in one, which is tricky. Editorial independence and integrity is one of the key values of our project, especially in the context of the misinformation battle. Self-governance chimes with the principle of subsidiarity, however, I believe the editor communities should still be held to adhere to various aspects of global governance, e.g. the Universal Code of Conduct."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "no arguments"
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Self governance at the community level would enhanace democracy."
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This approach engages the responsibility of the communities. However, it is necessary to have a right of control over the actions of these communities in order to better direct and correct certain abuses."
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I agree with editorial integrity, but I do not agree with the 'independence of the editor communities'. You have to know what is going on with the Wikipedias on East Asian languages, and if you know it, You could not agree."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Our main wealth are our communities, and they need to be fostered and stimulated as independent and self-governed entities. With the creation of the Universal Code of Condut the general standards that should orient independence and self-governance have been made clear."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Editing online and organizing offline are two different things. Editors can hide their legal identity while it is difficult not to reveal one's identity in organizing projects offline."
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Communities are at the heart of the movement and for this reason, it is a non-negotiable principle."
}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is normal because it also joins the decentralization to which I alluded"
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "\"Self governance of projects\" is a very broad term and open to many interpretations. I see it as part of the role of the charter will be to ensure that collaboration is a priority, as will independence in decision making on specific projects but we still remain part of the Wikimedia movement under the banner of the Foundation and the Global Council"
}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "True with certain constraints like adherence to things like the UCoC, principles like openness and reusability, etc. Local communities should not be free to engage in harassment, outing, or to decide that copyright violations are acceptable."
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Editorial independence is one of Wikimedia's highest qualities. The Movement Charter should protect the independence of projects, but balance this against the need to protect the entire movement from infiltration and other rogue actors."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "As stated earlier, the editor communities may be abused and malfunctioned."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I believe that it should be so that the member does not appear bound by integrity and independence."
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, absolutely. I hope that the charter will not only reaffirm but strengthen the integrity, independence and self-governance."
}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I believe self-governance must be promoted with some clear principles, policies & working guidelines."
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I oppose this, the reason being that not all editors,and affiliates truly have genuine motives while joining the movement , therefore independence should be limited to some extent , which in return can help to limit the ulterior motives of some affiliates or editors at large."
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I am a strong supporter of subsidiarity, and will insist on \"walking the walk\". Editorial control, in particular, has no reason to be handled above a local level. Almost all areas outside of that should also be handled at the local project level - it's the most \"core unit\" to me."
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Wikimedia being a global Movement, running its projects in more than 300+ languages, the communities should have their on self-governance inorder to scale up and prosper the movement."
}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should preserve the autonomy of communities and affiliates regarding their own governance."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This was the Foundation's great misunderstanding with the branding event of last year, that it could be so easy for a corporation to casually speak on behalf of \"Wikipedia\". There has been a failure to recognize the real independence of the projects and their volunteers. That said, there is also a global community, and there are limits to the independence of individual projects if there is misbehavior or promotion of POVs like ultranationalism."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is the main idea behind the success of all the projects, the editorial system work independently without any kind of pressure or influence upon."
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "each project have to be free to create their own ecosystem and gouvernance policy"
}
},
"risker": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I support this with a few concerns. We still need to have a way to deal with bad players on projects, and \"captured\" projects, when those projects aren't able to address this themselves. I'd also suggest that if there is a right to self-governance, there is also a responsibility for the projects to conduct themselves in a way that follows the movement's values."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "\"The statement isn't clear enough to me to take a position. Yes communities manage the projects but other orgs, like Wikimedia Foundation, can have good reason to step in, as we have seen in the last feww weeks/months. \""
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "While I believe that editor communities deserve the space to assert themselves in a manner befitting their national contest, the Movement Charter should do this in a way that does not undermine the greater aims of the movement. Ultimately, while communities should be able to govern themselves as they wish, ultimately they must remain accountable to the movement as a whole."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Just list I said the Foundation is good at making the servers always online, protecting legal enities from bad actors, the editing community is good at composing articles and contributing open knowledge. However knowing each other rules is also important to the greater good of the movement. We should have some kind of social events for each parties to know each other, whose are good at what."
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "While this is good in general, the movement as a whole needs to be able to provide general guidelines as to what the movement is and prevent any part being taken over by supporters of a single point of view."
}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is both a practical need for high-quality and bias-free content production, and a moral right of the volunteers whose time donations sustain the projects. Self-governance is not absolute (projects must uphold movement values and if they fail repeatedly, they might require an intervention; legal and security concerns cannot always be decentralized effectively) but exceptions should be minimal and still be under some framework of community oversight."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, though with some limits. Independence and self-governance are not absolute concepts. There are minimum standards, and the Charter will likely flesh out those standards. But this will be clarifying the status quo, rather than radically changing it."
}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Supportive, BUT... UCoC must apply."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This also aligns with theory of subsidiarity. Several recommendations speak about it. The movement charter should document it properly."
}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"vism": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "These are fundamentals of Wikimedia sites. These should be re-assured and included. The independance of communities is the ideal solution"
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Absolutely, this is a necessity. We must clearly establish that responsibility for content and project-side administration lies solely with the editor communities. This must be backed up with firm boundaries preventing any of our supporting organizations from encroaching on these domains (outside of specifically designated responsibilities such as, eg for the WMF, the limited exceptions for reasons such as legal, safety, or technical security needs)."
}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement must be what unites us, brings us together. And for that it must guarantee that none of the organizations that are part of the movement impose an editorial line in some of the projects. But there must be a unified basic guideline for the operation of each project for the sake of transparency."
}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes. The editor communities are the cornerstone of Wikimedia projects. Yet, as \"communities\", they're not organised tight, thus their voices are harder to be heard, comparing to chapters and WMF. The Charter is the right place to do right things."
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "Prioritizing Community Engagement",
"de": "Schwerpunkt im Community-Dialog",
"ar": "Prioritizing Community Engagement",
"es": "Prioridad en la participación comunitaria",
"it": "Dare priorità all'impegno della comunità",
"id": "Memprioritaskan Keterlibatan Komunitas",
"pt": "Foco no engajamento comunitário",
"pl": "Nadanie priorytetu zaangażowaniu społeczności"
},
"statement": {
"en": "#82: The Drafting Committee should prioritize community engagement, drafting iterations, and translations, even if it requires more time to \"do it right\"",
"de": "82: Die Entwurfsgruppe sollte im Prozess des Schreibens das Engagement mit den Communitys priorisieren, wie auch das Veröffentlichen von Iterationen und Übersetzungen, auch wenn das bedeutet, dass der Prozess länger, um es 'richtig zu machen'.",
"ar": "82: يجب أن تولي لجنة صياغة ميثاق الحركة أولوية للتواصل مع المجتمعات والترجمة للغات عديدة ولأخذ ملاحظات المجتمع بعين الاعتبار، حتى ولو تطلب ذلك وقتاً أطول من المتوقع.",
"es": "82: El Comité de Redacción debe dar prioridad a la participación de la comunidad, a las iteraciones de la redacción y a las traducciones, aunque requiera más tiempo para \"hacerlo bien\"",
"it": "82: Il comitato di redazione dovrebbe dare priorità al coinvolgimento della comunità, alle iterazioni nella redazione e alle traduzioni, anche se ciò richiede più tempo per \"farlo bene\".",
"id": "82: Komite Perumus harus mengutamakan keterlibatan komunitas dalam perumusan dan penerjemahan, meskipun akan memakan banyak waktu untuk dapat melakukannya dengan benar.",
"pt": "82: O Comitê de Redação deve priorizar a participação da comunidade, a redação das etapas e as traduções, mesmo que para isto seja necessário mais tempo até que \"fique bem feito\"",
"pl": "82: Grupa robocza powinna nadać priorytet zaangażowaniu społeczności, iteracjom redakcyjnym i tłumaczeniom, nawet jeśli będzie to wymagać więcej czasu, aby \"zrobić to dobrze\"."
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I prefer statement 72 in this regard \"he Movement Charter should be developed in an open, iterative, consultative, participatory and transparent process\""
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Community participation is desirable, and makes it adopt the Movement Charter with determination"
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Acceptance and recognition of this Charter by particular members of the Movement is vital for its success. The Charter should be considered as \"own\", elevate coherence, co-operation and trust, clarify the rights and obligations. Nevertheless, consultations are exhaustive for their participants and we need to accept that e.g. some people don;t want to invest their time here. Every consultation needs to end and consultations cannot be a central goal."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I mostly agree with the importance of community engagement, however, I also think it's important to get a first draft before we priorize community engagement."
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "To deliver a quality product, time will be needed to go through all these steps, but the result will be a very good and inclusive charter. This is much better than to rush after deadlines, stop all conversations, and deliver on time a charter that is not well understood, and that people do not \"appropriate\" and feel disconnected from it."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Charter should be released according to the schedule with a version number. An approximate date should be given for the publication for the next improved version."
}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes to open and consultative. But I wouldn't want another four year process like the MovStrat we just had. Let's keep the MC process open, but efficient."
}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Of course - Movement Charter is a document for and of the movement. This should be designed carefully as a lot of the communities are burnt out and tired of consultations and a drawn out feedback process."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I find this very important because the editorial board will have good reports in return."
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The peole is the heart of the community and the community is the heart of the movement, so it is important that priority be given community in several activities of the movement."
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The objective is to have a rich content that takes into account the contribution of a team that works in synergy of action"
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "If we are endorsing the Movement Charter once in a while, let's do it well. If, according to the circumstances, it is really necessary to extend the time period, I agree."
}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I agree. But we also have cut down unmeaningful attacks for blocking out of the making on the Charter."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We have a history of relatively low participation in decision-making processes in the Wikimedia movement for reasons such as:\n\n1. Volunteers don't know if they can and how they should participate 2. The main language is always English 3. The established schedules do not take into account the different local community dynamics\n\nA process as important as the Movement Charter should not be rushed and should prioritize the engagement of communities from different backgrounds. In particular, those that have been systematically excluded from the Strategic Movement."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "If we want to do something well, we must take the time necessary to achieve it. Haste will lead to an incomplete movement charter."
}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It's a long process and it's normal if you want everyone to contribute and participate."
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Originally the IGC was to create the GC, instead we have the movement charter drafting. How far down the road can we keep kicking this ball? Community engagement is important though at some point choices will need to be made, concessions in wording will be necessary to ensure equity across translations, yes that will take time. Realisitcally the MC should target to have a GC before we start 2040 Strategy process even better if that group can come together before Wikiconference in 2023."
}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Volunteers have constraints on their time, which means that stakeholders may not always be able to participate on the committee's timeline. Buy-in from the community is more important than meeting an arbitrary deadline."
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Wikimedia has been around in some form for over 20 years, and hopefully will be around for at least 20 years more. If we rush this project it will be yet another failed community consultation and we will have to try again later in several years. Let's focus on building a consensus throughout Wikimedia."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, of course."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Perhaps giving may develop possible forms from people's new words"
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is a movement charter, for the movement, by the movement. So we need to be inclusive of all constituents of the movement."
}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "As much as I support the idea of being inclusive, I am concerned this might take too much time & delay the process. We must have a limit on possible extensions."
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I strongly support this, its high time that the foundation begins operating in a way that is highly inclusive even though the cost is high and time needed is long but the results are far beyong the cost."
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The MC is not one complicated issue. It has been tasked with creating at least two powerful bodies, from scratch. It has to find what the Community believes its shared values are, assess what the current roles/responsibilities are, and more. MORE importantly, all that must be done *right*. Every language should be able to join, and if discussion is ongoing we shouldn't curtail it. Do it right, not fast."
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Community engagement and seeking the perspectives is very important to draft the Movement charter."
}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The drafting committee must ensure the participation of as many communities as possible."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We should not wait forever, but I do believe that the more iterations and the more buy-in from the community at large, the stronger will be the end product of the charter itself."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The charter itself is a leading step to a new era in the movement, to make it reliable and believable by people it needs to be built openly and with full transparency"
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "the moste of time, we need more time to do a good things and to take the right decision"
}
},
"risker": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Translation, in particular, is critical. We see even in this election process how challenging and time-consuming it can be. The MCDC cannot be successful without actively engaging with stakeholders. At the same time, we should recognize the level of community fatigue about strategy."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes!"
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Given the importance of the Movement Charter, it is paramount that we approach this document thoughtfully, with a lot of care, and with consideration to ensuring that all movement voices and viewpoints are adequately and appropriately taken into account. We do this by taking our time with it. A Charter that is finished quickly but half-done is a great disservice to our community, while a Charter that is finished slowly but done so thoughtfully will go further in achieving what we want from it."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "When I write my candidate statement, even I can communicate in English, I still write in my mother tounge, that is the Taiwanese Hokkein, one of the national language of Taiwan. Eventhough that there is no machine translation service available for my mother tounge, I know that using my national language in the internet space is the first steps for awarenese. Language barriers is a challenge for the movement, and we should make it easier for whose is interested and those want to particpate by translator to translate different documents, oral reports. And if possible, I can translate documents to recruit more people to the movement."
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Taken to an extreme, this could lead to endless discussion and no results."
}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is the most important design principle for the Movement Charter process."
}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I don't have a strong opinion on this. Doing it right is important, not taking forever is also important. If that becomes a problem, one option could be for the committee to focus on the rules for electing the Global Council, and then the drafting project could be transitioned to them."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Broadly, yes. Time is not infinite, but I expect a slow and iterative process taking maybe 18 months."
}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is shy the nº72 can't be done in deep, because every step must have diverse voices and languages, and making it consultive, participatory AND in as much languages as possible may take waaaaaaaay long."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Inputs and suggestions are absolutely essential. We should give time for this. However we can not wait indefinitely. Strategy 2030 process is already slow, and missed deadlines. We need to have a proper timline."
}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Our goal is to get the job done right, no matter how long it takes"
}
},
"vism": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Community engagement is must and prioritised. Ammends should be made based on inputs."
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is relative. Obviously, all these things are important, and we really need to do these things right. But if we keep going and going and it's been a year and a half, there comes a point when we should put a certain amount of priority on timeliness."
}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Certainly, it is necessary to make room for the opinions of the communities and to be very precise in the translations so that the Movement Charter is an inclusive and broadly representative document. But we also have to keep in mind that we need the Charter and its drafting cannot take much longer than the established deadlines."
}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Out projects are not perfect, but decent and running well without a Chareter. If we don't make the Charter \"right\", why do that? Why rush to do that?"
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "Democratic Governance",
"de": "Demokratische Strukturen",
"ar": "Democratic Governance",
"es": "Gobernanza democrática",
"it": "Governance democratica",
"id": "Pemerintahan Demokratis",
"pt": "Governança democrática",
"pl": "Demokratyczne zarządzanie"
},
"statement": {
"en": "11: The Movement Charter will state that all Wikimedia organizations and groups should have a democratic governance structure.",
"de": "11: Die Wikimedia-Movement sollte festschreiben, dass alle Wikimedia-Organisationen und -Gruppen eine demokratische Struktur brauchen.",
"ar": "11: سوف ينص ميثاق الحركة على أن ضرورة التزام جميع منظمات ويكيميديا ومجموعاتها بنظام حوكمة ديمقراطي.",
"es": "11: La Carta del Movimiento establecerá que todas las organizaciones y candidatos de Wikimedia deben tener una estructura de gobierno democrática.",
"it": "11: La Carta del Movimento dichiarerà che tutte le organizzazioni e i gruppi Wikimedia dovrebbero avere una struttura di governance democratica.",
"id": "11: Piagam Gerakan akan menyatakan bahwa semua organisasi dan kelompok Wikimedia harus memiliki struktur tata kelola yang demokratis.",
"pt": "11: A Carta do Movimento deve estabelecer que todas as organizações e candidatos da Wikimedia devem ter uma estrutura de governança democrática.",
"pl": "11: Movement Charter będzie zawierał wymóg, aby wszystkie grupy i organizacje Wikimedia posiadały demokratyczne struktury zarządzania."
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It would be great to have only membership organizations, and in such a way that *all* members of governing bodies are elected, either by the members or by the relevant community of volunteer editors."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Democratic rule gives a large leeway in management, but it can be manipulated by lobbies and powerful communities, and it oppresses under-represented communities."
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is a tricky question, as it requires us to define the \"Wikimedia organizations\" first. Some Wikimedia-related organizations (e.g. recipients of Wikimedia funds) are not democratic - e.g. they are foundations or closed small groups doing programmatic activity in their area - and I appreciate their work. Nevertheless, per e.g. equity principle I believe in the long run the Charter should promote e.g. associations and similar equitable kinds of orgs."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The difficulty for democratic governance with Wikimedia organizations is not about the general statement, which we would all agree, it's about determining voter eligibility and representation from non-editors, smaller communities."
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is a very tricky point that I both support and oppose. From one hand, you have big structures with many members who definitely need to have a democractic governance structure, but we have also on the other hands new groups that need first to \"be built and onboard\" before considering a democractic structure (or any structure). I would amend this statement by saying \"established groups\" and add the perspective of long term. In that case, I would be very supportive."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Charter will be the benchmark of how the different arms of the organisation will function."
}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Having a good structure in WMF affiliates is so important for whole community"
}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The most important thing is Inclusivity, ensuring all voices are represented, paying particular attention to removing barriers to participating in decision making. If a democratic structure is the best way to achieve that, then lets do it - but perhaps there are other ways."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "yes I am in favor of this proposal because for the good functioning of one of the organizations and wikimedia groups, democracy must be applied"
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Democratic governance is fine but in certain exceptional cases small amount of authocracy helps in speeding up decisions."
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is the best way to work in a collaborative way because the implementation of a democratic governance structure will see the adhesion of all"
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Roles requiring some kind of expertise should be filled by professional people."
}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "But we have to state real democracy in the communities."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "A democratic structure is needed for empowered participatory governance. Our culture is consensus driven, so we cannot also make all our interactions become a series of elections. More clarity on what we mean by democracy is needed if such a statement is to be made. The GC can come up with guidelines for governance as long as we have collectively agreed upon institutional designs we want."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "In some cultures, seniority plays a great role as nothing beats experience. Skills can be learnt but not wisdom."
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Having my doubts. Sometimes they have to make decisions that are not democratic to safeguard the interests of the movement."
}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Very normal for an organized movement which militates for transparency"
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "Not opposed to the principle . The choice of \"will state...\" leaves no room for discussion, consensus, or even ratification. On the practical side there are many reasons why committees need to have employees assigned or volunteers co-opted to them. Every time we say a specific group can only chose a representative on a governance committee it means that a truly democratic election cant be held as we deny others from being a part of the decision."
}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "To the extent possible. The charter can't make demands on a part of the movement (like WMF for example) that would force it to go against its legal organising documents."
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "In a decentralized movement, no central authority can dictate the organizing terms of another organization. If a corporation with a top-down command structure wants to support the Wikimedia movement, and (critically) are willing to engage on our terms, I say let them. They wouldn't be a traditional affiliate but should be recognized as a legitimate movement participant all the same."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is the foundation of the community self-governance."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Because without this the governance system is nothing, every people should have the right to speak."
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Democracy in organisations is definitely a value, but it can mean very different things in different cultural, political and legal contexts. For example, not all organisations can have elected board members. The 2030 principle of contextualisation should be considered here."
}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Standards of operations must be same for all groups/affiliates/communities."
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "When it comes to democracy, there is no universality therefore without some clear bounds on what is termed as democratic governance, the movement may sloght loose focus ,omce each community choses to operate how they want."
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I tried to think of an exemption, but any organisation actually under the Wikimedia umbrella should be democratically based"
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Democracy helps in building a deliberate and deside legislation of Wikimedia."
}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should promote democratic governance structures whenever is possible."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "(This was my own proposal.) It is normal and good practice for any sort of federation to insist on good governance among its members, and the Wikimedia Foundation and affiliates to ensure good governance must have majority-elected boards. These elections should include diversity-reinforcing mechanisms as appropriate. Diversity is complementary to democracy - they are both essential. It is a danger to the movement when community members are consistently outnumbered and can feel unwelcome."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Indeed"
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "yes, there are lot of affiliation that can not become bigger because of the governance system and structure"
}
},
"risker": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Most of our current organizations are not really democracies now, and many of them are currently structured to meet legislative requirements in their place of origin; for example, meeting requirements to be a charity or non-profit means having a board loyal to the organization, not its members. There is room for discussion here."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The statement is both vague and too general. Again, to me it's about checks and balance. But we have in the movement organizations that are not democratic organizations and that's ok. It really depends on the organization, the scope, the role, etc."
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Democratic governance is something that Wikimedia organizations and groups should aspire to, but we must consider that the Wikimedia projects operates on consensus, not necessarily democracy. I believe in democracy being used as a tool to achieve consensus, and it would be beneficial for our movement if the Movement Charter elaborates this direction and incentivizes organizations and groups to responsibly utilize democratic governance tools in reaching consensus."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I think the democratic way for governance is the long term ideology for the Wikimedia movement. With people from different countries and different background, we need to listen to people stories and let their voice matter."
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This will have to be done in a way that does not prevent the establishement of subsiduary organisations. For example it may become expedient to set up such organisation(s) to run servers, develop code, protect trademarks and so on. While having their own democratic structure it would be necessary that the Charter provided for their mission to be set by their parent organisation."
}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is a vague statement that's very open to interpretation. Inclusivity and participatory decision-making are stated principles of the 2030 strategy though, and I think they cover this somewhat."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, though 'democratic governance structure' is itself open to interpretation. We also need to be responsive to the context different groups work in, it is far more difficult to have a democratic governance structure in a totalitarian country."
}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Including the WMF."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Inclusion=yes, discussion = BIG YES. However democracy should not be reduced to mere vote-counting."
}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The fact of having a well structured group, will undoubtedly bring more order and avoid having several groups in one country in disagreement"
}
},
"vism": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "A democratic, meritocratic governance structure with reservation quotas for different demographies is very much needed."
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "Many wikis are explicitly non-democratic in many aspects, for good reasons. I do agree that democratic governance is essential for many groups, including the Wikimedia Foundation Board, the Global Council, and governance structures of affiliate groups, but it does not need to be a universal rule throughout all groups."
}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Each affiliated organization (Chapters, UG...) must have its own governance (according to the needs of that organization). In order to respect the principle of self-management of the organizations, the Charter should encourage and support the organizations to create their governance structures according to their needs and idiosyncrasy."
}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Democracy is very very important. However, it is also important to define what is democracy and to make sure the process of defining democracy is democratic."
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "Global Council as Part of a New Organization",
"de": "Globaler Rat als Teil einer neuen Organisation",
"ar": "Global Council as Part of a New Organization",
"es": "El Consejo Global como parte de una nueva organización",
"it": "Consiglio globale come parte di una nuova organizzazione",
"id": "Dewan Global sebagai Bagian dari Organisasi Baru",
"pt": "Conselho Global como parte de uma nova Organização",
"pl": "Globalna Rada jako część nowej organizacji"
},
"statement": {
"en": "#34: The Global Council should eventually become the governing body of a new international Wikimedia organization.",
"de": "34: Der Globale Rat sollte womöglich das Leitungsgremium einer neuen, internationalen Wikimedia-Organisation werden.",
"ar": "34: يجب أن يصبح المجلس العالمي -ذات يوم- مجلس إدارة لمؤسسة عالمية جديدة لويكيميديا.",
"es": "34: El Consejo Global debería convertirse finalmente en el órgano de gobierno de una nueva organización internacional de Wikimedia.",
"it": "34: Il Consiglio Globale dovrebbe alla fine diventare l'organo di governo di una nuova organizzazione internazionale di Wikimedia.",
"id": "34: Di masa depan, Piagam Gerakan akan menjadi badan pengurus sebuah organisasi internasional Wikimedia yang baru.",
"pt": "34: O Conselho Global deveria poder se tornar o órgão dirigente de uma nova organização internacional Wikimedia.",
"pl": "34: Global Council powinna ostatecznie stać się organem zarządzającym nowej międzynarodowej organizacji Wikimedia."
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "To support this statement I interpret \"new international Wikimedia organization\" as having legal entity, for example an association under Swiss law (like the International Federation of the Red Cross)."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Currently, the request is far from attainable and its consequences could be catastrophic. Gradualization in this matter is desirable, and it can be discussed once the new structures are well in-place."
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The global governing body needs to be established, nevertheless not only multiple ideas for such have been proposed, but also different concepts of the Global Council were expressed. Using e.g. European Union as an example, would it rather resemble the role of European Parliament, European Commission, Council of the EU, some arbitration body or something else? Personally I prefer to have it efficient and as modest as possible - but the shape is yet to work out."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "the Global Council should be the legislature that sets rules or appoint executives, the purpose of the council is to be representative, not executive. You can't have a council vote on every single issue."
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I am not sure that a new international Wikimedia organization should be created. I am personally believing that the global council should have enough power to be able to govern in the current organization that we have. The charter will need to ensure that it is mentionned, so that roles and responsibilities of this council are clarified Vs those of WMF and other instances."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I think it's a good idea though I don't have all info about it."
}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "yes I believe that is the ultimate goal of the Movement Charter process. A prospect of having an international governance body for the movement is very exciting."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "no arguments"
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The global council should only act as advisors to the new Wikimedia Organizations but must allow the organization itself to run their own governanace system that would suit their activities."
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is an international governing body to coordinate all actions of the different communities in all countries. The drafting of an international wikimedia strategic plan will guide all communities"
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I cannot believe the capacity of the global council as of now."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is unclear what is meant with international Wikimedia organization here and our structures should be discussed in details. Yet, the GC is mandated to orient our shared future."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The voice of those who literally build the projects has become unheard with only a handful given the opportunity at the WMF."
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The movement must be by and for volunteers"
}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Completely agree but it should be prepared: we do not need a brutal transition"
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "In an ideal structure yes, yet eventually is an unknown piece of string of any length! It'd be remiss to express an informed opinion either way without indepth consideration to legal, financial, reporting and responsibility required by any potential juristication in which the organisation could be based."
}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I feel this is an underlying assumption of the whole process"
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "From my point of view, the Global Council is its own Wikimedia organization, rather than the governance body of a \"second Wikimedia Foundation.\""
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Generally yes."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "In this, the opinion of all the in-charge can be considered only."
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "If the Global Council is actually supposed to govern, make decisions, manage funds, it will eventually need a corporate form and staff. Every other international movement is governed by an international organization with a democratic global assembly. There is no compelling reason we should be different."
}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I support this, Because I believe ,the charter may not fully guide the existing governing structures, therefore a global council may be a good channel through which resolutions provided within the charter can be fully implemented without hindrances by the previous policies."
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I don't have any current ideas on an \"international wikimedia organisation\", so this would be something where I'd be learning from the community consultations with absolutely no prior prejudices or viewpoints to misguide me."
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Although the movement requires decentralised and self governancing model of editor communities, I strongly support that a governing body of all Wikis is essential to have a holistic approach across the movement."
}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should guarantee overview mechanisms and saveguards regarding the role of the Wikimedia Foundation."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We need an international Wikimedia organization that is substantially both more democratic and more diverse than our current form of governance. Whether we can meet this need with the Foundation itself, or a new Global Council, or as an evolution of either of these remains to be seen."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Very supportive"
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"risker": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is a major change in structure that needs to be carefully analysed and discussed. There are a very large number of things to consider here, and I don't think it is appropriate to make that decision without getting a lot more facts and feedback."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Wikimedia Foundation should evolve to become the agent of the Global Council and answerable to the Global Council."
}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I can't have an opinion on structures and orgs that have yet to be defined. But I do strongly support and believe that the GC should be the overarching body setting the strategy of the movement that will have to be implemented by all organisations. Whatever the final structure that will be decided to set up."
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "While I support the Global Council in principle serving as the governing body of our movement and of an organization that would shepherd us forward, it is premature to advocate for it taking the place of the Foundation without more detail. As we develop this concept further, I'll be glad to lend my strong support to it becoming the supreme body of an organization if we're able to do so legally, logistically and with full consideration of the intricacies of our movement and all its moving parts."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "If the Global Council really making good progres and it is trusted by stakeholders, maybe one day it will transform into governing body of the Wikimedia movement. But honestly I am not quite confident of the future, let us making it represented different stakeholders, and each ones voice is heard."
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Determining the pros and cons of this will take some research. Also it seems like a relatively minor implementation detail."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Neutral. The Global Council should be the governing body of the Wikimedia Movement. But that does not necessarily mean we set up a new global organization on a parallel with the WMF. A greater role should be played by affiliates and new regional hubs - not creating a new global organisation."
}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, and add decentralisation to it, so we have global voices represented, who can route the WMF to be productive and useful for the communities."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is more like a crystal ball. How can a movement charter predict or instruct this? However this \"is\" a movement for, of, and by the people/community (larger community). Ideally the community and the movement should be in better position to plan/decide things.If the Global Council becomes such an entity, then \"yes\" definitely. We need to wait to see how things go."
}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"vism": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "With less beaurocracy"
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The statement is ambiguous, but I want to clearly say that I think the GC should _not_ become like a new WMF. If it becomes (or directly governs) an incorporated formal organization, and if it has its own staff, it should still be volunteer-dominated; the GC's members should heavily outnumber any small number of staff working for it. The GC should not centralize activities. A lot is going to be distributed, and many globally-oriented activities will be run by orgs other than the GC or WMF."
}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "GC should be the one who governs the destinies of the Movement, but we should not leave WMF aside. As I said before: Although WMF should not be the body that decides governance, it should work hand in hand with the World Council."
}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "No more governing bodies, thank you."
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "Gender-Neutral Language",
"de": "Geschlechterneutrale Sprache",
"ar": "Gender-Neutral Language",
"es": "Lenguaje neutro en cuanto al género",
"it": "Linguaggio neutro rispetto al genere",
"id": "Bahasa Netral Gender",
"pt": "Linguagem Neutra de Gênero",
"pl": "Język neutralny pod względem płci"
},
"statement": {
"en": "108: The Movement Charter should be written in a gender neutral language",
"de": "108: Die Movement-Charta sollte in geschlechterneutralen Sprache geschrieben werden.",
"ar": "108: يجب صياغة ميثاق الحركة بلغة محايدة (تساوي بين المذكر والمؤنث).",
"es": "108: La Carta del Movimiento debería estar redactada en un lenguaje neutro en cuanto al género",
"it": "108: La Carta del Movimento dovrebbe essere scritta in un linguaggio neutro dal punto di vista del genere",
"id": "108: Piagam Gerakan harus ditulis menggunakan sebuah bahasa yang bersifat netral gender.",
"pt": "108: A Carta do Movimento deve ser escrita em uma linguagem de gênero neutro",
"pl": "108: Movement Charter powinien zostać napisany w języku neutralnym płciowo."
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The strategic direction has diversity and inclusion in it. Writing in a gender neutral language would be obvious in this regard in my opinion."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Applying a gender-neutral language requires a deep understanding of how different languages work. It is a desirable goal if it can be achieved"
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Charter needs to be written in a possibly inclusive, precise and understandable manner - in every language it is (oficially) translated into."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Absolutely."
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Not only gender neutral language, but also inclusive language taking into consideration formulations that might exclude specific groups. I put \"supportive\" because I know that this is a big challenge in some languages (not in English), where the words are constructed in a different way and can be difficult to adapt."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "To make the Foundation gender neutral, a fourth gender, unique to the Foundation can be made, which will refer to the contributors."
}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is so good as we include everyone."
}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Where possible, yes, taking readability and translations in consideration."
}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes for inclusivity."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement's Charter must be written in gender neutral language. I totally agree because all genres contribute"
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Gender neutrality is very important in cases of this nature in order to make people irrespective of gender to fill comfortable in contributing to such activities."
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Charter should be in a form close to the language of each person, community that demands and requests it. If that is the majority choice of all the people on earth, I respect that. Dito the internal working version in committee according to the majority of committee members."
}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Moreover, we have to make it written in pre-disability languages."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "People with different gender identities must be welcomed and respected throughout the communications process and in the charter document itself. However, there is still no single universally accepted neutral language in many cultures, which can impair the understanding of the document from our diverse audiences."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "In some culture like in the Philippines, there is no he/she, as our languages are gender neutral."
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "To promote inclusion. However, I also think that the movement must also work on a kind of culture of difference.\""
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I support the use of inclusive language. Not using male-as-default language seems like the most basic step"
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "No one should feel excluded because of the language of our charter."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes this is a better suggestion so that people do not feel incomplete anywhere in the draft."
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is a document from the 21st century, so it should also use the language that is modern and appropriatly inclusive."
}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Strongly believe in following this approach"
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The charter should not be written in a gender-neutral language,because this may result into giving a blind eye to the most serius issue of gender inequality that has charatcerisez the movement operations in the name of neutrality The charter should be written in a gender sensitive language that gives a room for all genders and their special needs to endure equality and equity."
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "\"Editor\", and so-on, are the standard phrasing - I can't see any reason why it would be necessary to use gendered language for this document, and lots of reasons why it's better to use neutral language."
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Gender neutral language is important for all the Wikimedians to feel euqal and such that no gender feels Wiki is not their place."
}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should be inclusive and easy to read."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "In the 21st century all governance documents should be written in gender-neutral language and it would be absurd for the Movement Charter not to be. I would also say that it should be gender-inclusive language, rather than focusing on a gender binary."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is essential"
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"risker": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Note that this can be quite challenging for certain languages, but this is a worthy goal."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "YES! And in a as simple as possible English."
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is a given. We have people in the movement who don't identify as being part of the gender binary, and it is our responsibility that a document as important as the Movement Charter reflects that by using gender-neutral language where possible."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "In my mother tounge it is quite easy to write documents in gender neutral language. And for the movement, I am confident to achieve this goal."
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This would reduce gender bias and give opportunity to gender minorities across the globe"
}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "While supportive of the concept of gender neutrality, I suspect that it is particularly a western and possibly an English speaking concern. Is gender neutrality possible in languages where gender is a key part of the language?"
}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This follows from our principle of inclusivity (although at least in the English version it seems inconsequential in practice)."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "In the languages where this applies."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, agreed. However please note it is not applicable on all languages (such as Bangla (ISO 639-2: Bn)). Each language should use gender neutral language that is feasible according to a language properties."
}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "In order to avoid any kind of discrimination"
}
},
"vism": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Gender neutral language should be fundamental principle. The charter, being very important should be as inclusive and neutral as possible."
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "\"A gender neutral language\" is definitely something not bad, better with it than without it. But it's not enough. The ratio of male and female volunteers in Wikimedia projects is quite unbalanced, and I believe the lack of lingual gender neutrality is only a teeny tiny part of the reasons. The point is, is the focus on language issues the beginning or the end of the focus on gender issues? Unfortunately, we too often get too wrapped up in the rightness of languages, other than real improvements."
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "Regional Elections",
"de": "Regionale Wahlen",
"ar": "Regional Elections",
"es": "Elecciones regionales",
"it": "Elezioni regionali",
"id": "Pilkada",
"pt": "Eleições Regionais",
"pl": "Wybory regionalne"
},
"statement": {
"en": "#24: The Global Council should be largely elected on the basis of regional elections where Wikimedians vote for members to represent their geographical area",
"de": "24: Der Globale Rat sollte größtenteils auf der Grundlage von Regionalwahlen gewählt werden, bei denen Wikimedianer für Mitglieder stimmen, die ihr geografisches Gebiet vertreten",
"ar": "24: يجب انتخاب معظم أعضاء المجلس العالمي بناءً على انتخابات إقليمية لاختيار ممثلين على أساس جغرافي.",
"es": "24: El Consejo Global debería ser elegido en gran medida sobre la base de elecciones regionales en las que los wikimedistas voten por miembros que representen su área geográfica",
"it": "24: Il Consiglio globale dovrebbe essere in gran parte eletto sulla base di elezioni regionali in cui i wikimediani votano per i membri che rappresentano la loro area geografica",
"id": "24: Sebagian besar anggota Dewan Global harus dipilih melalui pemilihan tingkat wilayah, di mana para Wikimedian dapat memberikan suara pada anggota yang akan mewakili wilayah mereka.",
"pt": "24: O Conselho Global deve ser eleito principalmente através de eleições regionais nas quais os Wikimedistas votam em pessoas que representem a sua área geográfica",
"pl": "24: Global Council powinna być w dużej mierze wybierana na podstawie wyborów regionalnych, w których Wikimedianie głosują na członków reprezentujących ich obszar geograficzny."
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The statement I prefer is \"The election of the Global Council should balance representation of the electorate as a whole, and representation of (small) communities and affiliates\" as I prefer elections from a single pool by the whole electorate. I am not interested in pork barrel politics inherent to district voting."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Geographical representation gives the best guarantee of a fair representation of all communities. I consider it an aspect of their representation, though, but not the only one"
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "Wikimedia is a global Movement with many parallel platforms. A number of individuals and affiliates find it useful to cooperate regionally (including myself within the WMCEE), nevertheless as the whole we belong and work far beyond that: Indian Wikipedians writing en.wiki, Wikidatans or photographers cooperating all around the globe, particular affiliates sharing experience in e.g. education or research. I don't believe we should limit ourselves to 1 dimension, pretending being FIFA or IOC."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is bit vague, there should also be representation from editors who are not in regional chapter, and representation from under-representated communities regional election run the risk of amplyfing the voice of majority and diminishing those are minority."
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The global council should be a representative instance having members from different regions to represent their contexts and challenges. One learing we had from the last Board of Trustees elections is that having a regional perspective is important when you want to have diversity in a group."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The regional electors know the candidates best, but they must think how s/he/they will contribute for the betterment of the Foundation as a whole."
}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I don't think that crudely slicing the Wikimedia movement world into a few geographical chunks gives justice to the diversity of what we represent."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "For better handling of regional affairs, the World Council should be widely elected on the basis of regional elections where Wikimedians vote for members to represent their geographic area."
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Sure, this is certainly positive. Members from the community should be included in elections of such kind."
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is a good democratic process"
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Council should be the members, individual experts and the Foundation. My opinion as of 2021-10-08. Will there also be professional or sectarian \"ministries\"?"
}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "We have accepted representatives from theme groups or other user groups and marginalised groups also. So I suggest the number of the council should be 50 members(25+25)."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "We must expand representativeness of the GC, yet to focus solely on geographical areas would not be sufficient encompassing, as we have thematic organizations and geographical regions are often artificial constructions and not shared identities among community members."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "This may lead to a conflict between which region has greater representation on the global council"
}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This would allow the involvement and integration of all and strengthen the engagement of Wikimedians from different geographical areas."
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "If the movement is to have democratic governance structure, then it cant build in bias, or regional quotas likewise regions deny thermatic communities to have representation as each those arent democratic theoretically Asia with 2/3rds of the worlds population should have 2/3 of all seats"
}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I believe that geographic *and* project-based representation are important, and the council should include representatives elected by both sorts of votes"
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Geography is only one dimension of Wikimedia. We are also diverse linguistically, and in the types of contributions we make. The Global Council ideally represents multiple kinds of interest groups."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Generally true, but gender, sexual orientation and other basis should also be considered."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, of course, act as a representative of there thoughts or opinions that will play an important role in drafting."
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is too early to decide now. How the council will be elected will highly depend on what the roles and responsibilities and set-up of the council will be. It is the job of the drafting committee and the movement to decide how the Council will be constituted."
}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Global voting might impact the e(s)election of individuals from marginalised or developing communities."
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The global council, should be based on regional elections ,this wil deal with the issue of underrepresentaion that is still among those experienced within the movement."
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is an area where I'd need to see some more concrete ideas to make a judgement. If nothing else, a 1/3 of the editor base, at en-wiki, doesn't have a clear geographical area, and the same applies to some other projects like es-wiki and pt-wiki. But it also has some obvious benefits."
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "As the Wikimedia family is very big and contributors from under represented communities get less chance to interact with large group of peers. so it may lead to the problem that they might not recieve support and they might not get a chance to be in the committe and inturn leading to supress the under representated communites again. So, I support the idea of Regional elections."
}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Global Council should represent the geographic and linguistic diversity within the movement."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Largely yes, but not necessarily by majority as there are many non geographical alignments. It is quite reasonable that a large number of the elections should come on the basis of language and project as well."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Usually the volunteers from a certain geographical area would know better who shall be in the GC to represent them in the movement"
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "to have a good diversity on the committee"
}
},
"risker": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I think there should be a mix of ways to select members besides geographic areas. For example: projects aren't geographically bound, there are non-geographic affiliate groups, etc."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Global Council should be partly regional and partly elected on a worldwide basis."
}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The GC should be representative of the movement. We might need geographical representation, but we also have other scopes (thematic orgs for example) that will also need representation. We will need to be very mindful that the path to be member of the GC are inclusive and are not excluded communities that already are marginalized. We have editors in the First Nations that would be geographically under represented, we would have LGBTQI+ that would be under represented, etc... This will a key and critical topic to design a way that is truly inclusive and not just \"good enough\"."
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I generally support a regional approach to selecting the members of the Global Council, both in terms of composition and process, provided that it is within a framework that ensures the Council's composition represents the broadest swath of our community and is not solely geared towards geographical representation for the sake of token \"diversity\", where geography is well-represented but the dominant viewpoint nonetheless perpetuates existing systemic biases that hinder our movement."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Even though that I am willing to see each geographical area have their voice spoken, the cruel reality is people from wealthly countries is more likely to join the movement and have the spare time to do some thing. It could be fixed in the future, but not right away."
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Charity, they say begins at home. People should have a say in who represents them"
}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is only one of many ways in which a democratic governence structure could be set up. To chose this before considering alternatives would be a mistake."
}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is a reasonable option; picking the right option will require a lot of research and deliberation. It's too early to even have an opinion on it."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Neutral. This is one idea. It might well be the right idea. But we won't know until we have gone through the process of setting up the Charter."
}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I support this, but there are some groups that are not fixed to a geographical area, but to an interest. This should also be thought and decided."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "For reasons of diversity"
}
},
"vism": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It should be a combination of all to achieve the best representation. The issue with voting system is that even with STV, a desirable representation is hard to achieve. A quota should be previously defined first through community consensus; followed by elections"
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "Editors mostly do not identify with any particular region, and encouraging revealing one's location in order to vote would be counterproductive. We are, by and large, contributors to Wikimedia projects and languages, and if the elections are to be divided into groups, divisions by languages and projects would be far preferable over regional divisions, as a system for electing most GC members."
}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "No pro, no con, since I've got no detail of election and representation rules, like they're based on the population of areas or active users."
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "Simple Language",
"de": "Einfache Sprache",
"ar": "Simple Language",
"es": "Lenguaje sencillo",
"it": "Linguaggio semplice",
"id": "Bahasa Sederhana",
"pt": "Linguagem simples",
"pl": "Prosty język"
},
"statement": {
"en": "#96: The language of the Movement Charter should be as simple as possible",
"de": "20: Die Movement Charta sollte es ermgölich neuen Formen von Wissen in den Wikimedia-Projekten einzubinden.",
"ar": "20: يجب أن يسمح ميثاق الحركة بابتكار وسائل جديدة لتمثيل المعرفة في مشاريع ويكيميديا.",
"es": "20: La Carta del Movimiento debería abrir el camino a nuevas formas de representación del conocimiento dentro de los proyectos de Wikimedia",
"it": "20: La Carta dei movimenti dovrebbe aprire la strada a nuove forme di rappresentazione della conoscenza nei progetti Wikimedia",
"id": "20: Piagam Gerakan harus dapat membuka peluang untuk terwujudnya bentuk perwakilan ilmu pengetahuan yang baru dalam proyek-proyek Wikimedia.",
"pt": "20: A Carta do Movimento deve abrir caminho para novas formas de representação do conhecimento dentro dos projetos da Wikimedia",
"pl": "20: Movement Charter powinien otworzyć drogę dla nowych form reprezentacji wiedzy w projektach Wikimedia"
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "There is a limit to simplicity to legal documents such as the MC."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Of course, the simpler the language, the easier it is to handle the material, to convey the idea and to understand the meaning"
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "\"Everything should be as simple as it can be, but not simpler.\""
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "To avoid different intepretation and allows for easy translation"
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Although skilled people will participate in the movement charter, it is important to have a language that is simple and understood by all, as this is supposed to be a document for all. However, the language should not be too simple, to the point that ideas could be interpreted differently, or are not clear enough. It is important to find a balance, within a language as simple as possible."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The language should be simple and where legal terms are used, they should be explained clearly (maybe as footnotes or references)"
}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I'm wondering if by \"language\" you mean english or french or the tongue."
}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, let us practise to 'speak human'."
}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes for inclusivity and ease of translation - but not at the cost of making it vague."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Absolutely for a better understanding of all the contributors."
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This would enable more people to understand the whole process."
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The language must be simple for a better appropriation and comprehension"
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Simple, unambiguous and in relatively Simple English."
}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I agree that our Charter should behave in easy-to-read writings, but we should not simplify our Charter, which has to manage most of it."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Our language must resonate among diverse constituents. The burden of making it understandable is ours to cope with. We should be simple, not simplistic."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Simple and no jargons."
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "In order for everyone to be able to read the letter and know what it contains, it should be as simple as possible"
}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We should therefore translate (according to the possibilities) in order to take into account all the linguistic diversities of the movement"
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "With the aim of facilitating the understanding of all stakeholders."
}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Simple language helps avoid ambiguity and helps make translation easier."
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Simple language is easier to read and to translate."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes. Long statements are suffering and hard to understand correctly."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Absolutely it will facilitate everyone to understand and know and have ideas"
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "To faciliate & promote inclusion in review, discussions and adoption."
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I strongly support this, since the wikimedia movement has more than 300 languages represented, having a unified language is very hectic and near to impossible ,therefore, use of a simple language possible, will be a good approach to ease communication and dealing with a laguage barrier issue."
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "While it seems obvious that it should be as simple *as possible*, I can imagine reasonable editors could disagree wildly as to what is necessary. If more complex language allowed problems to be avoided, would that necessary, or just beneficial?"
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "As we are drafting a Movement charter for over 300+ language Wikimedians from vast backgrounds, having a simple english is very essential."
}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should be inclusive and easy to read."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We should not devolve into corporate buzzwords, but neither should the text be so generic that it lacks teeth and enforcement mechanisms."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It's a new era and we need to make everything accessible to everyone, the old fashioned way of complicating the language and make it hard to understand and filled with acronyms is gone, not we need to have everyone onboard."
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "if we want to have a diverse committee we need to involve even people that have not good level of English"
}
},
"risker": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Simple, clear writing reduces the opportunity for misinterpretation, and is easier to translate. Avoid jargon, which is almost always misinterpreted, even within the same language."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The language of the charter should be as simple as is feasible without sacrificing precision and clarity, and no simpler than is consistent with precision and clarity."
}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes and widely translated"
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should definitely be written with as much clarity as possible to avoid misunderstandings and to preempt the possibility that it may be perverted to fulfill ulterior aims and ends. It must achieve this not just in its use of simple language that would allow for easy translation into all languages, but also in its use of logical, clear and precise value statements that effectively summarize our dreams and aspirations and can be easily applied to any cultural context."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Due to each one have different language background, it is important that the language is simple. And if you have some basic common English vocabulary, it should be possible to understand the Movement Charter documents"
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Ambiguity might lead to confusion. Everyone, no matter their literacy level should be able to understand what the movement charter is about and what/whom it represents"
}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "However this will not prevent the language from being as complex as it needs to be."
}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Always a good idea, for multilingual documents especially so."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Strongly agree. The Charter will contain complex concepts. But that makes using plain language as important as possible, particularly to make sure the Charter can be translated."
}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "And, FIY, and IMHO, whe shouldn't use abbreviations or examples only used at enwiki."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The language should be as simple as possible to comprehend."
}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "for a very good understanding of all"
}
},
"vism": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It should decipherable to all sections of the world; including those who are not accustomed or outside of the English centric web"
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "\"There are several competing priorities relating to the Charter's wording:\n1. It must be easy to understand and translate. This has overlap, but is not synonymous, with \"\"simple\"\".\n2. For the parts dealing with rules, roles, and responsibilities, the text must be precise. Any ambiguities are going to result in lots of unpleasant arguments down the road.\n3. It would be somewhat helpful if the parts about broader values/goals had some amount of aesthetic appeal.\n\nBalancing these will be a challenge.\""
}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes. No more bureaucratic tones, please. (I hope the word \"\"bureaucratic\"\" is simple enough. It would be really sarcastic otherwise.) (I hope the word \"\"sarcastic \"\" is simple enough. It would be really sarcastic otherwise.)\""
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "New forms of Knowledge",
"de": "Neue Formen des Wissens",
"ar": "New forms of Knowledge",
"es": "Nuevas formas de conocimiento",
"it": "Nuove forme di conoscenza",
"id": "Bentuk-bentuk baru Pengetahuan",
"pt": "Novas formas de conhecimento",
"pl": "Nowe formy wiedzy"
},
"statement": {
"en": "#20: The Movement Charter should open the path for new forms of knowledge representation inside Wikimedia projects",
"de": "20: Die Movement Charta sollte es ermgölich neuen Formen von Wissen in den Wikimedia-Projekten einzubinden.",
"ar": "20: يجب أن يسمح ميثاق الحركة بابتكار وسائل جديدة لتمثيل المعرفة في مشاريع ويكيميديا.",
"es": "20: La Carta del Movimiento debería abrir el camino a nuevas formas de representación del conocimiento dentro de los proyectos de Wikimedia",
"it": "20: La Carta dei movimenti dovrebbe aprire la strada a nuove forme di rappresentazione della conoscenza nei progetti Wikimedia",
"id": "20: Piagam Gerakan harus dapat membuka peluang untuk terwujudnya bentuk perwakilan ilmu pengetahuan yang baru dalam proyek-proyek Wikimedia.",
"pt": "20: A Carta do Movimento deve abrir caminho para novas formas de representação do conhecimento dentro dos projetos da Wikimedia",
"pl": "20: Movement Charter powinien otworzyć drogę dla nowych form reprezentacji wiedzy w projektach Wikimedia"
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The charter should be neutral about forms of knowledge representation"
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The existence of new and renewable forms of knowledge is at the heart of the inevitable continuous development"
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Movement Charter should be a fundamental document on our goals, roles, rights and responsibilities. I don't think it should go into details like enumerating particular projects, defining their scope or intervening into their e.g. verifiability or notability standards. The Charter should recognize our main principles, and ensure they can be pursuited in novel yet responsible ways when 1) it has a fair chance to be effective and efficient and 2) volunteer participants and resources are in place."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Wikimedia in its current form still has only one prominent project, that's the Wikipedia."
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I have been advocating other forms of knowledge in different occasions (such as oral knowledgem that is very present in my region). I definitely think that the movement charter is the right place to give the importance it deserves for all the new forms of knowledge representation, because knowledge is not only written, and we are a global movement."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I strongly support the 2030 strategy recommendation 'Innovate in Free Knowledge' which talks about this. But is the Movement Charter the place to 'open the path for it'? I think it should be a simple global governance document. We should be able to work on the new forms of knowledge regardless of the Movement Charter."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "no arguments"
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This when done would broaden the knowledge content on Wikimedia."
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The creation of new projects further develops the progress of wikimedia"
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Charter should recognise the knowledge gap and differences and recommend finding the methodology for getting it, As the Strategy Initiative No. 40."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "A major aspect of the 2030 Strategy Process is inclusiveness, and if we do not expand knowledge representation underrepresented communities will remain excluded."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I don't get this. Refer to #96."
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is more important than representation based on region"
}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This increases the impact and the coverage of different knowledge: things that enter into the 2030 vision of the Movement."
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "there should be minimal barriers to knowledge sharing from the movement charter. Consideration into some form of scope being defined should occur as there are areas where we should not venture because the negative impact on the overall movement and projects"
}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Representing the sum of human knowledge requires new type of projects, and ways to capture knowledge beyond conventional written sources. I believe the movement should encourage experimentation in ways to capture this knowledge"
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I support creating a straightforward process for establishing new Wikimedia projects. These new projects could let us experiment with forms of knowledge representation not appropriate for current projects."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, of course."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "This view may be taken keeping in view the views and advance future of all the members."
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Charter will describe the structures of the movement of the future, a movement that will grow and be more inclusive. The new structure should also enable new forms of knowledge to be represented, but how this will be done will not be laid out in the charter."
}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Historically, the focus has been inclined towards some selective projects, its important to open the channels for other projects."
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Each generation comes with up with innovations, in various sectors of life includng knowledge therefore,the charter should be drafted in a way that allows representation of new forms of knowledge to avoid conservatism."
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "\"I've heard \"\"knowledge representation\"\" to mean anything from \"\"new projects\"\" (Good! But what should the Charter change about them?), to \"\"force notability policy changes\"\" (a breach of subsidiarity, so bad), to \"\"aid new forms of audiovisual content\"\" (again, great, but would have to hear from the Community what the Charter should do about it). So...yes to some, no to others, others I have no position on? See you on the Talk Page!\""
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should represent the geographic and linguistic diversity within the movement, including new forms of knowledge representation."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We are long overdue for new forms of knowledge representation that originate in the communities. We have not approved new sister projects, other than proposals from those with direct WMF staff or board connections, in many years, and the Proposals for new projects has sadly become a mockery of itself. I think that improving knowledge representation on existing projects and developing new projects are both essential, and Wikispore is an effort that I have started in this direction."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It will be certianly the new path as it will lead as a pioneer in such movements."
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"risker": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I would be surprised if this was controversial."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should focus on existing forms of knowledge representation. Otherwise it will become a vehicle for grandiose experimentation by developers."
}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, yes, yes, yes!!! It is a great opportunity to set in stone that we, collectively, work and find a solution to be able to welcome all knowledges, even those that don't fall in the classical western definition. Especially knowledge from oral culture communities."
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I strongly believe that the Movement Charter can and should open the door to knew paradigms of how we present information and the kinds of information that would be imperative for us to document. Currently, the way we document knowledge on the projects is heavily tilted towards an inherently Western model of knowledge-keeping. The Charter can serve as a tool for us to open ourselves up to other forms of knowledge kept by more marginalized communities, which in turn we can document for posterity."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, indeed. And I hope with my participation, I can make the whole process a great experience, everyone is happy to join and do some thing."
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This follows clearly from the relevant 2030 recommendation, \"Innovate in Free Knowledge\"."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I tend to agree. So long as 'opening the path for new forms of representation' isn't taken to mean imposing large changes of e.g. licensing on existing projects that don't want them."
}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I proposed this! ;)"
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"vism": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Wikimedia should support all forms of knowledge representation for providing free educational knowledge in all valuable forms. meta's Proposals for new projects gets a lot of ideas, but most have less active participants and less traction. There are missing platforms that are within the educational scope of Wikimedia. WikiSpore is a much welcoming initiative to aid new educational wikis."
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "That's not the Charter's purpose, and I think it is unlikely that the efforts to include new forms could be directly helped by anything in the Charter's content. More generally, we could speak about procedures for creating new projects, or generally how to support groups of editors trying to do new things, but that would not be at all specific to this issue."
}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I'd rather say \"not to close\" instead of \"to open\"."
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "Universal Code of Conduct",
"de": "Universal Code of Conduct",
"ar": "مدونة قواعد السلوك العالمية",
"es": "Código de Conducta Universal",
"it": "Codice Universale di Condotta",
"id": "Kode Etik Universal",
"pt": "Código Universal de Conduta",
"pl": "Powszechny Kodeks Postępowania"
},
"statement": {
"en": "#63: The Movement Charter should mention the Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC)",
"de": "63: Die Movement Charta sollte den Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) erwähnen.",
"ar": "63: يجب أن يتطرَّق ميثاق الحركة إلى مدونة قواعد السلوك العالمية.",
"es": "63: La Carta del Movimiento debería mencionar el Código de Conducta Universal (CdCU)",
"it": "63: La Carta del Movimento dovrebbe menzionare il Codice Universale di Condotta (UCoC)",
"id": "63: Piagam Gerakan harus memuat ketentuan mengenai Kode Etik Universal.",
"pt": "63: A Carta do Movimento deve mencionar o Código Universal de Conduta (UCoC)",
"pl": "63: Movement Charter powinien odnosić się do Powszechnych Zasad Postępowania"
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The reason I proposed this statement is twofold: I don't want to have discussions within the MCDC about UCoC, and I don't want to have a copy of the UCoC in the charter. A reference suffices."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I think it's taken for granted, the UCoC is an essential part of every participatory work"
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Universal Code of Conduct should be mentioned, and some responsibilities to execute it should be given to particular parts of the Movement."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Main fear is that there will be duplicated effort with the UCoC drafting committee. Also I think UCoC has the same legitimacy as the Movement Charter, hence I'm not sure if we need to put it in there."
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Universal code of conduct is a guiding document in our movement. It is therefore logical and good to have it mentioned in the movement charter."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Charter should include all policies and practices."
}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes it's a key element of governance and mutual expectation."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement's Charter should mention the Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) in order to show everyone what to do."
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The UCoC is very important for people to know hence loudable to mention it."
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is for a good functioning of the communities"
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Charter link with UCoC, and we strengthen each other by revising them constantly."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, the UCoC is a shared standard and should drive the work of the GC."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Code of conduct may suppress some rights and could be used to suppress vocal Wikimedians."
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "They all go together: these are the laws and regulations ..."
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Standards for conduct should be elevated from a Foundation policy to a movement policy"
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "To create the least confusion, the Movement Charter should ratify the Universal Code of Conduct while creating mechanisms to amend or replace it."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, of course. Or the movement chapter may fail."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Must be absolutely without it the draft will be an incomplete copy"
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "All applicable principles, policies & expectations must be well documented."
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I support this, this is because the interests and needs of smaller communities(e.g: The need for recruiting more people,raising awareness) are different from the needs and interests of the larger ones( eg: Maintaining editors, expanding projects and partnerships) but ,This difference should not be the reason for any of the two communities to be left out ,Therefore a balance in serving their needs will be a better alternative."
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This would be logical - the Charter won't particularly mention conduct, but as one of two movement-wide documents of its type, the two will be inherently bound"
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should promote a healthy governance by explicitly mention the UCoC."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Good behavior and a harassment-free environment are essential to good community working relationships, and certainly bear mention in the charter, with the Universal Code of Conduct as part of that effort probably bearing specific mention as well."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is essential"
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"risker": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This may not need direct mention, but might well fit into \"policies and processes of the movement\"."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes. This should be part of the things that are the corner stone of our movement."
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Universal Code of Conduct, as a guide for how members of our movement should behave themselves, should definitely be part of the Movement Charter. Whereas the Movement Charter enumerates our rights and aspirations, the Universal Code of Conduct enumerates our responsibilities and duties as Wikimedians, and both should work in concert with one another."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I am 100% with this, the Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC). From my experience of Chinese Wikipedia, I think we should keep in mind the UCoC while we are discussing editing policy and resolve disputes"
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This follows clearly from the 2030 recommendations: \"Create a Movement Charter to: ... Set requirements and criteria for decisions and processes that are Movement-wide ... e.g. for ... Maintaining safe collaborative environments, ... Defining how communities work together and are accountable to each other, Setting expectations for participation...\""
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I mentioned before an example of why."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "UCoC should be an important mechanism. With community involvement and inputs, the UCoC can add strength to a project or community."
}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"vism": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "UCoC is a much needed policy and should be enforced everywhere"
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Obviously, this is dependent on whether the community approves the UCoC, which is a decision that will likely be made one way or another well before the Charter will be finalized. At the time in which the Charter decisions are made, if we do have a set of rules which the community has established as binding on all, I do think that those rules, and any other policies to be binding on all orgs, should be legitimized either directly (by mention) or indirectly (by policy system) in the Charter."
}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is important. But I'm not sure if it should or must be put in the Charter. We don't need a Charter covering everything, do We?"
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "Balance of Interests",
"de": "Interessenausgleich",
"ar": "Balance of Interests",
"es": "Equilibrio de intereses",
"it": "Equilibrio degli interessi",
"id": "Saldo Minat",
"pt": "Equilíbrio de interesses",
"pl": "Równowaga interesów"
},
"statement": {
"en": "#84: The Drafting Committee should balance the interests of the large communities with the needs of the small ones",
"de": "84: Die Entwurfsgruppe sollte die Interessen der großen Communities mit den Bedürfnissen der kleinen in Einklang bringen",
"ar": "84: يجب أن تسعى لجنة صياغة ميثاق الحركة إلى أن تجمع بين رغبات المجتمعات الكبرى واحتياجات المجتمعات المُهمَّشة.",
"es": "84: El Comité de Redacción debe equilibrar los intereses de las grandes comunidades con las necesidades de las pequeñas",
"it": "84: Il comitato di redazione dovrebbe bilanciare gli interessi delle grandi comunità con i bisogni delle piccole comunità",
"id": "84: Komite Perumus harus dapat menyeimbangkan kepentingan komunitas berukuran besar dengan kebutuhan komuntias berukuran kecil.",
"pt": "84: O Comitê de Redação deve manter um equilíbrio entre os interesses das comunidades grandes e as necessidades das pequenas",
"pl": "84: Grupa robocza powinna zrównoważyć interesy dużych społeczności z potrzebami małych."
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The statement I prefer is \"The election of the Global Council should balance representation of the electorate as a whole, and representation of (small) communities and affiliates\" - so the GC will balance interests in policy making, and the MCDC has to secure a balance in the composition of the GC."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Balancing the interests of large communities with the needs of small communities must be the preoccupation of the Movement Charter to reach the difficult point of balance"
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is a very general statement. Yes, I believe smaller stakeholders should receive disproportionately larger attention (e.g. while measuring per capita) to fulfil principles of equity and diversity, and result with the better community (and projects) overall. Such solutions have long history in democratic systems, incl. the EU and the USA, ensuring that the smaller states are not that dominated by the large ones."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This definitely need some work."
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is an important point. Although power balance might not be equal, we are a global movement and we must ensure that all our communities have their interests preserved and taken into consideration. The drafting committee must ensure the needs of the small groups are respected, the same way the interests of the big ones are."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Charter should represent all communities equally."
}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I take some issue with the phrasing - Surely 'small communities' have interests as well, not just needs to be addressed? I also think the Movement Charter should keep as its compass the knowledge equity, which invites us to focus on the interest of those who have been missed out."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The editorial board should balance the interests of large communities with the needs of small ones because everyone has the same rights"
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This would make smaller communities to realize their needs and grow as a result."
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Taking into account the needs of all communities leads to a good functioning of Wikimedia in general"
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Moreover, we have to balance unrecognised communities, marginal communities, and under-recognised communities."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "More than the number of active volunteers for each project, it is necessary to consider the distribution of power in the Wikimedia movement and look for ways to support the meaningful participation of marginalized groups, even if they represent large or small communities."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "If we want to give equal voice to each one, number should not be a factor."
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Since the beginning, the Wikipedia, Commons and Wikidata communities have been favored. It's time to change that."
}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "In order to promote the integration of small communities which often lack the means"
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "the needs of the few need to be weighted with the needs of the many - sorrry Mr Sowards, & Mr Spock"
}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The drafting committee should consult with experts to find a way do implement this that has been proven to balance these interests without giving small groups either endless veto ability or allowing their interests to be disregarded."
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "A small community is a large community that has not had the chance to grow yet. The Movement Charter should actively support the growth of smaller communities"
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "because cooperation is very important."
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I believe we need to practice equity to reach the balanced state."
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I support this , considering the fact that a bigger percentage of the groups and affiliations are volunteers, this will provide the mentioned a chance not to only contribute to the wikimedia movement, but also earn revenue that can help them to contribute their local communities's political,social and economic development ,things which was not possible at the moment since all operations depend on funds provided in form of grants to run wikimedia related projects."
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This would be one of our most critical areas. Starting with our own ratification method - how can we avoid large communities ignoring small communities, or a mass of small projects ignoring the bulk of editors. Large communities have needs too, not merely interests (the only reason I've not very-supportive), but they are better able to defend them"
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The drafting committee must ensure the participation of as many communities as possible."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, this is in the nature of every federation. We should give special attention to small communities and projects, especially those that show potential for growth, while continuing to support the larger projects that also serve larger communities and readerships."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is essential"
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"risker": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Even our largest communities started off as small ones, and the growth potential of the movement is mainly in small communities. At the same time, it is the large communities that attract most of our donations. There is a symbiotic relationship here."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We need the Charter to be inclusive, which will mean to clearly balance the needs of every one and even be very clear that we need to push in favor of marginalized communities."
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We like to pitch our community as being diverse, but we know that within this diversity some views are heard more regularly than others. It is imperative for the Drafting Committee to take into consideration not just the interests of large, influential Wikimedia communities, but also those of smaller communities who are inherently more disadvantaged. It is our responsibility to ensure that we take into account all of our community's viewpoints, no matter how obscure."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "\"I am from a small community. Taiwanese people are familiar with Wikipedia, a good resouce they can copy and paste words to their reports from school or work, they are not used to the idea of you can contribute too. We need more resource for small communities to attract people to contribute open knowledge."
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is a vague statement that's very open to interpretation. Some sort of balancing should happen for sure, although I don't think they should necessarily be considered equally important; rather, we should always consider projects through the lens of how much current value and future potential they hold for the Wikimedia mission."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is more evident when we are talking about languages. As the discussion will largely happen in English (I'm writing this in English and is not my language) there will be small communities whose voice won't be represented."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Definitely. We need to ensure equity. Not only communities, we need to strengthen non-Wikipedia projects such as Wikisource."
}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "it will probably help the small group to grow rather than feel marginalized"
}
},
"vism": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes. Small communities can bring big outputs when given enough support. Many wikimedia projects need a lot of suppirt considering the value output it can generate"
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, of course. Again, a statement definitely right but the real challenge is how."
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "Ratification from all Core Groups",
"de": "Ratifizierung durch alle Kerngruppen",
"ar": "Ratification from all Core Groups",
"es": "Ratificación de todos los grupos básicos",
"it": "Ratifica da tutti i gruppi",
"id": "Pengesahan dari semua Kelompok Inti",
"pt": "Ratificação por parte de todos os grupos principais",
"pl": "Ratyfikacja przez wszystkie grupy podstawowe"
},
"statement": {
"en": "#92: The Movement Charter should ensure ratification has confirmation from *all* core groups, including: editors, projects, affiliates, Board of Trustees",
"de": "92: Die Movement Charta sollte von *allen* Kerngruppen ratizifiert werden, sprich: Autor:innen, Projekten, Wikimedia-Organisationen und -Gruppen, wie dem Board of Trustees der Wikimedia Foundation.",
"ar": "92: يجب أن تصادق على ميثاق الحركة *جميع* الفئات الكبرى في حركة ويكيميديا، بما فيها: المحرّرو، ومشاريع الويكي، والجهات الشقيقة، ومجلس الأمناء.",
"es": "92: La Carta del Movimiento debe garantizar que la ratificación cuente con la confirmación de *todos* los grupos centrales, incluyendo: editores, proyectos, afiliados, Junta Directiva",
"it": "92: La Carta del Movimento dovrebbe assicurare che la ratifica abbia la conferma di *tutti* i gruppi principali, inclusi: editori, progetti, affiliati, Board of Trustees",
"id": "92: Piagam Gerakan harus diratifikasi oleh semua kelompok inti dalam gerakan, termasuk para penyunting, proyek, organisasi mitra, dan Dewan Pengawas Yayasan Wikimedia.",
"pt": "92: A Carta do Movimento deve garantir que ratificações sejam verificadas por *todos* os grupos principais, incluindo: grupos de edição, projetos, afiliados, Conselho de Administração",
"pl": "92: Movement Charter powinien zapewnić ratyfikację przez *wszystkie* podstawowe grupy interesów, w tym: edytorzy, projekty, afilianci, Rada Powiernicza"
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "These core groups are all constituents to the MC."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I do not think that this is possible, because the work is voluntary and may alienate many, on the one hand, and on the other hand, the lack of certainty that communities have adopted (or not adopted) the Movement Charter may hinder its implementation in reality."
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Difficult to achieve especially when we understand that particular projects and language versions are different communities, and e.g. a support of German Wikipedia does not mean support of French Wiktionary. Nevertheless, it is important that the communities validate these rules, improve, adopt and execute them in the future."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The difficult part is to determine what count as ratification, and who is the eligible voter."
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The charter needs endorsement from all the movement components and its preparation needs to be an inclusive and open process. In this regard, it is important that the ratification is agreed by all groups, and most importantnty, NO GROUP should have more weight than the others, or any kind of veto rights. For me, this joins strongly the transparency requirement, so that everything is put openly at the table when we prepare this founding document for our movement."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Confirmation from the Board will be important."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "In order to grant credibility, the Movement Charter must ensure that ratification has the confirmation of * all * major groups, including: publishers, projects, affiliates, board of directors"
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "When all are involved, certainly things would go on well."
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is a great opportunity to make all communities work together"
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The ratification should be democratic and efficient: we have not allowed any jammings to make the Foundation and the committee tired and throw it up."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The MC should be agreed upon by stakeholders. Yet, we should first agree on how this ratification process should happen and what the core groups are."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Once and for all, the movement charter should define who are its stakeholders and what are the specific roles of the editors, affiliates, those who do not want to be part of an affiliate/cannot be part of an affiliate, paid staff and WMF in decision making."
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Since everyone makes up the movement, their voice must prevail in this process."
}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I think we should be limited to large entities (core groups, board of trustees, affiliates and projects). Not the editors. N.B: The movement should campaign to bring together or to regroup even if there are always people who will not want (this is the choice that must be respected)"
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "With the aim of involving the inclusion of all, the Movement Charter should ensure ratification has confirmation from."
}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Acknowledging that WMF Staff are part of the movement, many of whom are active beyond their employment contractual requirements. There will need to be considerable effort put into the ratification process to ensure equity while not amplifying voices who may already have decision making powers or significant volume in many of these \"core groups\""
}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I'm broadly supportive, but this requires more nuance in terms of what the smallest group that *must* ratify this looks like (since an active user group only requires 3 active members) and what sequence of events would be triggered by a failure of some stakeholders to ratify the charter"
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The legitimacy of this process is my top priority. It does not matter how much work we do if it will get discarded at the end of the process. We should aim for 70% ratification by movement organizations and groups."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "Obtaining general confirmation from them may not be possible, since they may not share the same view as the movement chapter."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Must be absolutely confirmed so that a decision can be taken after knowing everyone's opinion."
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The charter cannot ensure that, this is the responsibility of the grafting committee and the supporting staff. The statement is misleading, but I agree with the spirit of it."
}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "As much as it is important, it might be challenging to get approval from all parties. There should be some flexibility in approach considering the practical barriers."
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I strongly support this , ratification will help all ratified communities,editors and groups to have a common ground of operations,holding each other accountable, which in the end will help all communities ,editors and groups to achive a common objective of the movement."
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter will both change and formalise the roles and responsibilities of every group. As such, implementation without EVERY group agreeing would be immoral. I would also say that a 55-60% majority of each group should also be sought, as nothing extremely controversial should be included."
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should address as many stakeholders as possible."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is essential and will make for a stronger, more meaningful, more useful document. We can't necessarily have every single actor sign on in the movement, but we need a strong majority / consensus from all classes of actors."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "This might be good and might be bad depending on the situation, but to be fair it should be implemented anyways."
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"risker": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "While I believe that there needs to be broad support and ratification of the charter, I think this needs to be a lot clearer. I'm hesitant to create a situation where a very small minority holds the rest of the movement hostage. (Example: do you mean EACH project needs to ratify, all 800+ of them? Each affiliate? ALL editors?)"
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is a critical question and a bit vague. Ratification should include everyone, but what if the French Wikipedia community opposes, does it stop everything? This is a way more complicated question than one that can be answered here by one person."
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is important that the Movement Charter have buy-in from all segments of our movement, and we must obtain that buy-in through a consultative process that allows communities to have their say and, ultimately, to allow them to ratify the document. That said, while this may be the case, we should do so in a manner that doesn't allow intransigent communities to derail the process, believing that their viewpoint should reign supreme even if everyone else thinks otherwise."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Not just editors, the other people who do not have time, or are more familiar with boring administrative duties, also contribute to the Wikimedia Movement. So their voice should be listened."
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I am assuming this means projects as a whole / affiliates as a whole, not ratification by every single project/affiliate separately (which is unworkable in practice). In which case, yes, these are important constituencies that should have a say in the decision."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "\"ALL\" core groups may be impossible. We should have a qualified number of groups ratifying it."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "As this is \"movement charter\", inputs from all stakeholders or participants are essential."
}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "For the reason of more time that it may take"
}
},
"vism": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Confirmation from editors and communities should be a priority"
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I would hope for active participation from all these groups during development of the Charter. However, community-wide ratification is the central point; I would expect sign-on from the Board and affiliates to follow that. Formal approval by our supporting organizations will be necessary for the Charter to carry weight, but I would not expect their confirmation to act as a separate decision from community's. The community's ratification is what determines the movement's position."
}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes. No rush. See the Statement 82."
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "Global Council as Counter-voice",
"de": "Globaler Rat als Gegenstimme",
"ar": "Global Council as Counter-voice",
"es": "Consejo Global como contra-voz",
"it": "Consiglio Globale come voce alternativa",
"id": "Dewan Global sebagai Counter-voice",
"pt": "Conselho Global como um contraponto",
"pl": "Głos przeciwnika"
},
"statement": {
"en": "27: The Global Council should be a counter voice to the Wikimedia Foundation",
"de": "27: Der Globale Rat sollte eine Gegenstimme zur Wikimedia Foundation darstellen.",
"ar": "27: يجب على المجلس العالمي أن يعارض في مواقفه مؤسسة ويكيميديا (أو يكون \"صوتاً مضاداً\" لها بالمصطلح الحرفي).",
"es": "27: El Consejo Global debe ser una voz alternativa a la Fundación Wikimedia",
"it": "27: Il Consiglio Globale, rappresentando il movimento, dovrebbe fungere da contraltare alla Wikimedia Foundation",
"id": "27: Dewan Global harus dapat menjadi tandingan dari Yayasan Wikimedia.",
"pt": "27: O Conselho Global deve servir de contraponto à Fundação Wikimedia",
"pl": "27: Global Council powinna być przeciwwagą (countervoice) do Wikimedia Foundation"
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The (BoT of the) WMF and the GC should closely cooperate and collaborate, and the GC will provide some checks and balances on the WMF. The GC will be different, that is not like a counter voice. The GC will represent anything community and volunteer editor, while the WMF will not, as they aren't a membership organization."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "For the Global Council's voice to be heard by the Foundation is required, but for it to have a \"counter voice\" turns things into a pointless struggle."
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I don't think a \"counter voice\" is a fortunate term here. The Global Council should have its own, separate voice - and hopefully other entities, including the WMF, shall generally speak and act in a good alignment. Differences are inevitable but (again, hopefully) they will be a benefit of our diversity, and an opportunity for further improvements."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "Doesn't make a lot of sense. The Global Council should be a different voice, not a couter voice"
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is a tricky statement as it tries to put the global council in opposition to the Wikimedia Foundation. I do not think that this is the case. The global council will be an instance that will represent communitities, and communitites are not always against WMF. Sometimes the global council will indeed be a counter voice to the WMF, but in other times maybe they will work together to benefit the communities in certain projects. Therefore I am neutral as both scenarios can happen."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Global Council may agree or oppose Wikimedia Foundation, but their extent and limits to their rights , responsibilities should be claerly defined by the Charter."
}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "No to working 'against'; yes to working together towards the same mission."
}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "In the long term the Global Council will be the voice for the community, superceding a need for another one."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "no arguments"
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The counter is good though should always be positive and result oriented."
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is to balance the votes"
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Rather a supplement."
}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "Because the Foundation should behave more now, we now need to support voice or start something new."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The GC should work with all stakeholders to move our mission forward."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "There will be no clamour for Global Council if WMF reflects the voice of the community."
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "When the Foundation forgets the principles for which it was founded, the global council must make sure that they are remembered."
}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I do not know if this is really necessary or if it is rather necessary to find bridges so that the 2 entities work in a mutual way."
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The WMF is not the movements enemy, such a bad faith assumption should never be given any credence or promence within the movement. The Charter, the GC, WMF, and most significantly everyone of us should all ensure that good faith collaboration is the at core of all our efforts."
}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I see this as one possible outcome, with another being that WMF and the BOT becoming subsidiary to the Global Council"
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Wikimedia Foundation is organized and sophisticated. It is more than capable of representing its own interests and advocating for its own survival. The same cannot be said for our masses of volunteers, who find themselves arguing as individuals against this entity with hundreds of employees and an ever-evolving structure not totally visible to the public. The Global Council will amplify the voice of our volunteers and make it easier for the Foundation to get constructive feedback."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I see no obvious reason on this."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "Not at all because cooperation is very important."
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Global Council will balance the interest of the communities, the organisations and the Wikimedia Foundation. We are one movement, working with each other, not against each other."
}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I oppose this because there is a need of collaboration and consultation than to revolt"
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "To me, the GC should have the capability to be a counter-voice, but I oppose that it is something to actually seek out. Hopefully it will aid the WMF from some missteps, and work on behalf of the users"
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should guarantee overview mechanisms and saveguards regarding the role of the Wikimedia Foundation."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Strategy is fundamentally about the distribution of power, and the movement strategy process as led by the WMF has not always made this clear. Decentralization means just that, a shifting of power away from a central place. We do not always have the same perspectives, but I think our shared values mean that we do have complementary ones. I believe that the Global Council, if done right, will complement and in fact further support the work that the Wikimedia Foundation was always designed to do."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "Not necessarily, the global council and the foundation can work together to guid the movement to the full implementation of the 2030 strategy"
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I believe if we have one voice in the movement it will be better then if we have to parallel voices"
}
},
"risker": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "All groups should be working collaboratively to meet the shared goals. That takes discussion, compromise, mutual respect, consensus. The Charter should not be proposing a body whose intended role is to be oppositional."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Global Council should be the governing body of the Wikimedia Foundation. It should not be a counter voice because it should be superior to rather than independent of the WMF and so should be the voice."
}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I cannot support a statement that is by design creating a spirit of opposition within the movement. The GC should set the strategy to be followed by the movement, included Wikimedia Foundation. The GC should be providing checks and balances within the movement, included to Wikimedia Foundation.\""
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Global Council should serve as a counterbalance to the Wikimedia Foundation in that it should serve as a sober chamber of thought that works in concert with the Foundation, rather than against it. In this sense, the Council should be a check on the WMF's activities in that it serves as a second pair of eyes that can best scrutinize its priorities. The relationship between the two need not be antagonistic, but rather the two should check one another to reflect the needs of our movement."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I want to pursue the goals of the Wikimedia movement, not to pick fight with Wikimedia Foundation. We should work together to pursue the common goals"
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Charter should described the roles and a balance between different entities in the movement, instead of defining forces and counter-forces."
}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is clearly not the role the 2030 strategy assigns to the Council. It should be \"enforcing accountability of all Movement organizations\"; that is, it should be (for the things in its scope such as mission alignment, resource allocation and strategy) above the WMF, as an oversight body, not opposite to it."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Global Council will be a *different* voice to the Wikimedia Foundation. But the Global Council and the WMF must work constructively together. If it sets out to be \"against\" the WMF it will not succeed."
}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "No, the Wikimedia Foundation must be working for the needs appointed by the communities and the Global Council. We don't need two opposed forces: we need a WMF working for the Movement, not a Movement against the WMF."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I do not really want to call it \"counter\", but it should be an independent, strong voice."
}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I am not sure whether the Global council can just take over decision making power at once immediately after election."
}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I reserve myself because I don't understand what \"counter voice\" means in this concept"
}
},
"vism": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It should act to complement and complete the missing attention from the Foundation"
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "No, I don't think a \"counter voice\" would be the correct description. I imagine the GC will have a similar relationship to the WMF as to affiliates and hubs: Per the recommendations, the GC would be enforcing accountability in various areas, overseeing allocating funds to them, enforcing certain good practices, ensuring Charter compliance, etc. (Along with the GC's more general work, on strategy, in central decisions, and so on.)"
}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I believe the Global Council should have a goal of its own. If WMF is aganist the realisation of the goal, go make the counter voice. There may be possibility that what the Global Coucils will do is mainly be a counter voice to the WMF, but that's the means, not the ends."
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "Funds Allocation",
"de": "Mittelzuweisung",
"ar": "Funds Allocation",
"es": "Asignación de fondos",
"it": "Assegnazione dei fondi",
"id": "Alokasi Dana",
"pt": "Distribuição de fundos",
"pl": "Podział środków finansowych"
},
"statement": {
"en": "#45: The Movement Charter should recommend a percentage of Wikimedia Movement money to allocate to Wikimedia organizations and groups",
"de": "45: Die Movement Charta sollte empfehlen, dass ein gewisser Prozentsatz des Wikimedia-Geldes an Wikimedia-Organisationen und -Gruppen gegeben wird.",
"ar": "45: يجب أن يوصي ميثاق الحركة بتخصيص نسبة محدّدة من أموال حركة ويكيميديا للمنظمات والجهات الشقيقة.",
"es": "45: La Carta del Movimiento debería recomendar un porcentaje de dinero del Movimiento Wikimedia para asignar a las organizaciones y grupos Wikimedia",
"it": "45: La Carta del Movimento dovrebbe raccomandare una percentuale di denaro del Movimento Wikimedia da assegnare alle organizzazioni e ai gruppi Wikimedia",
"id": "45: Piagam Gerakan harus merekomendasikan sekian persen dari anggaran Gerakan Wikimedia dialokasikan pada kelompok dan organisasi Wikimedia.",
"pt": "45: A Carta do Movimento deve fazer uma recomendação sobre a porcentagem de dinheiro do Movimento Wikimedia que deve ser destinada às organizações e grupos da Wikimedia",
"pl": "45: Movement Charter powinien rekomendować, jaki procent pieniędzy w Ruchu Wikimedia przeznaczony będzie na grupy i organizacje Wikimedia."
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "In my ideal view the Global Council will have a say on the spending of all money raised in the movement and pay a fee to an Internet Service Provider to host the project wikis (and the WMF might be that ISP)."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Global Council can ask for more transparency in the allocation of funds. Defining it in terms of percentages, however, triggers agendas, burdens and goals that cannot be limited to a strict percentage or amount."
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Decentralisation and organisational diversity and equity require existence of many thriving organisations, wisely and carefully operating considerable assets. I would not recommend putting exact solutions into the Charter, nevertheless some guidelines, hard limits of concentration of Movement resources or other mechanisms to promote equity and diversity can be put in."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "This doesn't seems like the role of the charter, but rather the job of the Global Council, which will be established by the council"
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Maybe the movement charter will not need to give explicit numbers or percentages, but I think that on a wider perspective, the charter needs to mention that the communities need to have more decision making power on the funds donated for free knowledge, this includes of course percentages of money to be allocated to groups, but even more points related to power in general, and joining the roles and responsibilities spliting between WMF and the global council."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "There should be a provision of providing funds, when needed to the Wikimedia groups."
}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I'm not sure I understand this."
}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "It should map a way in which the Movement has full ownership of the funds regardless of percentage allocation."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I think so because it could help organize the activities of Wikimedia groups."
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Although there has been rapid disbursement of funds to communities, when this is done it would enhance more of that."
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This sharing will limit the expenses"
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It will promote interaction and mutual awareness. Risk - wise use of money."
}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "We have to stress on it, but It is what really doing now. so I think this is not recommendable."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Equity in decision-making processes also involves the allocation of resources. If we want communities across the globe strengthened, participatory and sustainable, it is necessary that communities have access to fair resources with their realities and needs, especially for marginalized groups in order to repair inequalities."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Without the editors and the communities and affiliates, there will be no Wikimedia."
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is very much needed"
}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is therefore important to define the percentage criteria according to the categories of groups or organizations"
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "There are many variable as to how finances should be managed, any decisions should be the consultative between the GC, WMF, and BoT on an as needed basis. A set defined distribution would be counter productive to responding to the future needs of the community in a timely fashion."
}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I see this as a role of the Global Council that the Movement Charter drafting committe shouldn't usurp. That said, if a useful framework emerges from the drafting committee's work, I support the idea of them passing that on to the GC."
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The specifics of policy should not be written into the Movement Charter. Decisions regarding funding should be made by the Global Council, which the Movement Charter Drafting Committee is not."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This will facilitate the implementation of advance future planning"
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "Too much detail, this should be decided annually and on a policy basis."
}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Charter should not only address financial but various other aspects of movement projects & growth as well."
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I support this , considering the fact that a bigger percentage of the groups and affiliations are volunteers, this will provide the mentioned a chance not to only contribute to the wikimedia movement, but also earn revenue that can help them to contribute their local communities's political,social and economic development ,things which was not possible at the moment since all operations depend on funds provided in form of grants to run wikimedia related projects."
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Anything that can be devolved, should be. As such, I feel this would best be handled by the Global Council and hubs. The way that should be done, however, could be included"
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should guarantee overview mechanisms and saveguards regarding the role of the Wikimedia Foundation, including financial decisions."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The funding percentage directed toward community-led efforts is not easy to find, which is in itself a difficulty - it should certainly be rather more than the <5% currently. We don't necessarily need an exact number, but we do need structures, so that a much higher percentage of funds do actually go toward community and volunteer-led groups. Obviously this shift cannot happen all at once, but should be a gradual process as groups are given the resources so that they can mature in development."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is already happening in allocating the grants, but it would be more helpful to have it clear and documented in the Movement charter."
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "/after working with all community and having good consultation. we can setup a system that can recommend a percentage of money allocation"
}
},
"risker": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I see this as the role of a global council or similar centralized body,without hard-wiring a certain percentage into the Charter itself. While I think it might be useful to say something about the value of funding movement organizations and groups (perhaps as one of the purposes of a global council), groups need to know how much money they are going to get, not what percentage of an unknown number they will receive."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "What else would it be used for?"
}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The GC should decide on the strategy and, as a result, how we allocate ressources, money included."
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "Although I agree in principle that the Movement Charter should recommend the direction of resources towards the fulfillment of our movement's aims, especially to disadvantaged and marginalized communities, it would be a disservice for us to impose an arbitrary number. As opposed to simply saying \"n percent should go here\", the Movement Charter should instead define areas where the Foundation must invest its significant resources in, and that it must show good faith in fulfilling that investment."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I am with this, and hope that we could discuss the actully percentage of resource to allocate to affiliated organizations"
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "This would likely lead to long term inflexibility to the detriment of the whole movement."
}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "More precisely, this should be decided by the Council and regularly reviewed / updated. So it should not be \"set in stone\" in the Charter."
}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "The budget needs flexibility, as it must adapt to changes in the world. Codifying it in a way that requires massive consultations to change is a terrible idea. Instead, the Charter should say how the process of agreeing on the budget should work."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I see the Charter containing broad principles for funds dissemination, and possibly some details of a process. But the Charter is not the right place for a % figure."
}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "This may be something practical from the current situation. But talking about a percent can't be opposed to the future needs. And if we have a WMF working for the movement, the money will be allocated more fairly."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "If the Charter should allocate money percentage for organizations, new innovations may be affected or delayed"
}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We want our UGs and chapters to be organized and who says organization, we see the expenses (payment of office rent, water, electricity, taxes and why not hire a minimal staff)."
}
},
"vism": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Much needed. Adequates funds are necessary for the growth of the communities. Funds can catalyze the growth. Also supporting members with a lot of content to add should be written in. This should also work against paid editing."
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I could picture some general guidelines for determining appropriate resource allocation, but no, having the Charter itself include set specific percentages for particular organizations or types of organizations seems inadvisable."
}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes. We have heard enough sweet words, while the money is the real important thing. “A percentage of Wikimedia Movement money” is a great way to deploy economic powers, easy to understand and easy to put into practice."
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "Attention to Marginalized Communities",
"de": "Aufmerksamkeit für marginalisierte Communitys",
"ar": "Attention to Marginalized Communities",
"es": "Atención a las comunidades marginadas",
"it": "Attenzione alle comunità marginali",
"id": "Perhatian pada Komunitas Marjinal",
"pt": "Atenção às comunidades marginalizadas",
"pl": "Zwrócenie uwagi na społeczności marginalizowane"
},
"statement": {
"en": "#55: The Movement shall give due attention to under-recognized / marginalized communities",
"de": "55: Die Movement Charta sollte marginalisierten / nicht anerkannten Communities die entsprechende Aufmerksamkeit schenken.",
"ar": "55: يجب على ميثاق الحركة أن يولي اهتماماً معتبراً للمجتمعات المُهمَّشة والأقل حظاً.",
"es": "55: El Movimiento prestará la debida atención a las comunidades sub-reconocidas/marginadas",
"it": "55: Il Movimento presterà la dovuta attenzione alle comunità sotto-riconosciute/emarginate",
"id": "55: Gerakan Wikimedia harus memerhatikan komunitas yang kurang terperhatikan/termarjinalkan.",
"pt": "55: O Movimento deve dar a devida atenção às comunidades com pouca representação / marginalizadas",
"pl": "55: Ruch będzie zwracał należytą uwagę na słabo rozwinięte/marginalizowane społeczności"
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The statement I prefer is \"The election of the Global Council should balance representation of the electorate as a whole, and representation of (small) communities and affiliates\"."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Stimulating marginalized communities is essential to ensuring diversity"
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "A very general statement, similar to 84. Yes, I believe smaller stakeholders should receive disproportionately larger attention (e.g. while measuring per capita) to fulfil principles of equity and diversity, and result with the better community (and projects) overall. Such solutions have long history in democratic systems, incl. the EU and the USA, ensuring that the smaller states are not that dominated by the large ones."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "That's long overdue, we need more support for small chapters in finance and legal"
}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "If we want to really be a global movement in all the aspects, this is a point that needs to be urgently adressed. The charter will definitely need to include this area and mention that efforts have to be put there."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We tend to forget this in the movement. So, it's time to think of."
}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "Assuming here is meant that the MC should mention this: I do not think the MC is the right place to tell communities what to do. Though I very (very!) much support giving attention to underrepresented groups, enforcing this in the charter is not the way to go."
}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Marginalised communities should be a part of the Movement, not something to give attention to."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "this will be very interesting because the under-recognized / marginalized communities will feel involved in the movement"
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This would help communities to grow."
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This action will give strength to these marginalized communities to reintegrate and especially to solve their problems"
}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "To allow them to flourish, to support them, but to remain oneself an original, unique contribution to the world."
}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is the reason that I decided to go up to this election."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "These are the voices that most need to be heard so that we have a charter that guarantees fair practices in the movement, as this is where the Wikimedia movement has systematically failed over the last few years, including during the Movement Strategy process itself. If the movement charter does not pay enough attention to this, the ripple effect of privileging the demands of communities and groups that already have power will be greater and longer lasting. This needs to change."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "There will also have under-recognized and marginalized communities in any movement. Something we should address."
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "They are in great need of it for their stability and growth."
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Equity within the movement is important"
}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I see this as a key component of the Movement Charter"
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The sum of all human knowledge includes the knowledge of people who have trouble getting their knowledge out there because of problems way bigger than the Wikimedia movement. We are in a unique position to help and we will learn more about our world in the process."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Generally, yes."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I believe the marginalized communities will be given due attention"
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Considering the limited participation & representation, this must be a high-priority."
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "i strongly support this, Because the past and present structures within the movement shows,that there are various communities that are still margilaized or underrepresentate.d which limits the efficacy of existing equity policies that govern the movement ,which in the end delays the achivement of the movement's objectives of Wikimedia becoming the essential infrastructure of the ecosystem of free knowledge, and anyone who shares our vision will be able to join us"
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter should represent the geographic and linguistic diversity within the movement."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I've tried to do this in my own work, and in developing the collaborations of the Wikimedia New York City chapter with the eventually global groups that have emerged from it, like Art+Feminism and AfroCrowd. Free knowledge has to put a special emphasis into correcting the errors and prejudices and omissions in larger society, just as we do for other forms of misinformation, and this path lies through additional efforts to document undercovered histories and experiences."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The futuer in this movement is in the emerging communities and the underrepresented countries/languages. Focusing on them will make the movement the first true international and global entity."
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "yes because if we will not give them importance, they never can comme bigger"
}
},
"risker": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "While I support this concept, this question is directed to the Movement as a whole and not the Movement Charter. I think there should be room in our discussions about the Charter to include something about this, but it needs to be understood that the Movement Charter and the Movement are not the same thing."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "The extent to which the Global Council should focus on underrecognized and marginalized communities should be a decision to be made by the Global Council rather than imposed in advance."
}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This should actually be a clear and very intentional focus."
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Movement Charter, as a statement of our values and aspirations, must give due weight and attention to communities that don't get to participate in its development. As the document will end up being reflective of our movement as a whole, it is imperative that the document be equally as reflective of those who are the quietest in our movement as much as it reflects those who are the loudest."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I am positive about this statement. However for the small communities, just like Taiwan, there are some technical aspects block these communites to be heard. We need to figure out why they are not active."
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is a vague statement that's very open to interpretation. But yes, \"focus[ing] our efforts on the knowledge and communities that have been left out by structures of power and privilege\" is part of the the 2030 strategic direction."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I don't see how anyone could disagree with this."
}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Especially to those that can't discuss this."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Not only communities, but projects such as Wikisource, Wikiversity etc also. Equity is essential."
}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Although under-represented communities have limited resources and expertise, they should be given due considerations and get involved in important issues as some might be willing to learn and give more to the foundation."
}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "I prefer equality for all (equity) so that there will be no more marginalized groups"
}
},
"vism": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "True. So much can be gained by giving attention to them. Not only to bridge the gap; it will also help develop a lot of valuable content. The over represented communities have already reached the point of diminishing returns in terms of content value. Highly growing communities should also be given attentions; foundation's support should not be a limitting factor for growing communities"
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, of course. Again, a statement definitely right but the real challenge is how."
}
}
}
},
{
"title": {
"en": "External Advice",
"de": "Externe Beratung",
"ar": "External Advice",
"es": "Asesoramiento externo",
"it": "Consulenza esterna",
"id": "Saran Eksternal",
"pt": "Aconselhamento externo",
"pl": "Doradztwo zewnętrzne"
},
"statement": {
"en": "#78: The Committee should seek review and advice from others, including experts outside of the Movement",
"de": "78: Die Entwurfsgruppe sollte Feedback und Rat von anderen einholen, inklusive von Expert:innen außerhalb von Wikimedia.",
"ar": "78: يجب على لجنة صياغة ميثاق الحركة أن تسعى للحصول على نصح وإرشاد في صياغة الميثاق، بما في ذلك النصح من خبراء غير ويكيميديّين.",
"es": "78: El Comité debe solicitar la revisión y el asesoramiento de otras personas, incluidos los expertos ajenos al Movimiento",
"it": "78: Il Comitato dovrebbe cercare la revisione e la consulenza di altri, compresi gli esperti al di fuori del Movimento",
"id": "78: Komite Perumus harus meminta saran dan pertimbangan dari pihak luar, termasuk para pakar dari luar gerakan.",
"pt": "78: O Comitê deve procurar aconselhamento e avaliação de outras pessoas, incluindo especialistas de fora do Movimento",
"pl": "78: Grupa robocza powinna zasięgać opinii i porad innych osób, w tym ekspertów spoza Ruchu Wikimedia"
},
"positions": {
"adhuikeshoven": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I would prefer the MCDC to tender research and consultants to interview hundreds of individuals from all stakeholder groups, and have them summarize their findings, with the MCDC is the role of a steering group, because we as volunteers don't have the time to interview hundreds of individuals."
}
},
"nehaoua": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Relying on experts is imperative, especially in the legal issues. Consulting the largest number of users also enriches the charter and increases its effectiveness."
}
},
"aegismaelstrom": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Seeking good benchmarks, external examples and advice is generally recommendable. External expertise can be highly valuable especially to show new perspective, and to avoid legal or governance pitfalls stemming from new proposals. Certainly, it should not be an excuse for unnecessary delays, or careless copying not suitable solutions - I trust the selected group will know how to utilize this possibility properly."
}
},
"aliyushaba": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"alvonte": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"anasssedrati": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The committee will be small in number, and even with the best intentions, it will not have all the expertise of the world. I anticipate that there will be need for external review and advice, especially from skilled experts who can provide the best information and knowledge about their area. This experience already happened with the Strategy working groups, and proved being successful, as many good points came through this external advice."
}
},
"anupamdutta": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "As this will be a historical document, it should be reviewed by all stakeholders."
}
},
"bamlifa": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"ciell": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"dariacybulska": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We are unique as a movement, but what we're trying to do is somewhat new to us, and insights from others in e.g. participatory decision making would be helpful - especially when considering how to include those, who are normally put off or excluded from traditional wiki processes."
}
},
"didierwiki": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I have no problem with this if the advice of others and outside experts can contribute to the advancement of the movement, and moreover the movement includes a community of volunteers and knowledge sharing."
}
},
"dinnani": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Consultative processes usually lead to positive results and that I recommend."
}
},
"djibril": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"dusankrehe": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "An unbiased opinion can enrich, increase quality and also raise the level in the eyes of others."
}
},
"ellif": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We have not to stop using consultants! But also, their voice is used for advice only."
}
},
"ericaazzelini": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Of course, the experts in the Wikimedia movement are individual volunteers and organized communities: we are the ones here giving our time to the movement, even when WMF staff come and go. But we need to adopt a learning practice with external stakeholders so that there are no blind spots in this process. My suggestion is to learn mainly from open knowledge organizations governance systems."
}
},
"filipinayzd": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "These \"others\" should have joined the movement and sought to be part of the committee. It is defeating to have \"outsiders\" called \"experts\" who are probably paid staff. If ever \"expert's advice\" are needed, the whole community should tell which ones are acceptable or not."
}
},
"galahad": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"geugeor": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "We don't have a monopoly on knowledge; the committee must therefore surround itself or be accompanied by experts: The charter must be as perfect as possible (in terms of form, in terms of substance, in legal terms, in terms of drafting, etc.)"
}
},
"gilbertndihokubwayo": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {}
},
"girassolei": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"gnangarra": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The MC Committee should be encouraged to seek expert advice including from outside the movement given the scope of the charter"
}
},
"guettarda": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I see this as a key role of the drafting committee. There's always more expertise in the collective knowledge of the movement and among experts outside the movement than there is within a small committee"
}
},
"harej": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I hope we are not the first group trying to solve this problem. We can learn a lot from our peers, and I call on the Wikimedia Foundation to cover the cost of consultants should we choose to engage them."
}
},
"imacat": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes, of course."
}
},
"kanhaiprasadchourasiya": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "It should be decided according to the tasks"
}
},
"lyzzy": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"manavpreetkaur": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It's always advisable to have observers with specific expertise & unbiased approach to review the Charter going to be a refrence document for global movement."
}
},
"ndahiroderrick": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "I oppose this ,Because seeking advise outside the committe, may limit the relevance of the committe itself, not forgetting the delay in taking decisions due to prolonged engagements of people outside the committe."
}
},
"nosebagbear": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This is interesting - prior to seeing this statement I hadn't really considered outside help, but I'm in favour of review and advice from everyone, but a really distinct viewpoint like that would be particularly interesting and useful"
}
},
"nskjnv": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"oleksandrhavryk": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"padaguan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The drafting committee must ensure the participation of as many communities as possible, including experts outside of the movement."
}
},
"pharos": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Absolutely, I believe that the Wikimedia movement is not an island - it exists as part of various social, educational, and technological trends - but chiefly as a social project in the larger world. We have much to learn from the history of other movements, and other movements parallel to our own in action today, but we should also not discount the particular expertise that our various Wikimedia communities have developed over the past 20 years in this beautiful endeavor."
}
},
"ravan": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Some points might truly need an extra knowledge even if it's external, this is necessary to have the Movement charter in the best version."
}
},
"redakerbouche": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I believe that the future committee will have a diverse skills but we need to have an opportunity to consult experts and other persons outside of the movement to have new point of view"
}
},
"risker": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "When working on the Roles & Responsibilities task group, we received some excellent advice and information from groups outside of the movement, and this exposed us to ideas we probably would not have considered. Some of those ideas were incorporated in our group's recommendations."
}
},
"robertmcclenon": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "The Committee should avoid the mistake of thinking that they are creating a grassroots movement for social change; and they certainly should receive professional advice."
}
},
"schiste": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Yes! The topics at hands are wide and complex. Even just from a legal perspective, we will need external support to be able to prepare the different discussions properly. Also, having people providing other point of views, experiences, or doing research for us will be critical to design the right future for our movement."
}
},
"skyharbor": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "It is important that we take into consideration as we write the Movement Charter lessons that we can learn from other organizations, movements, etc. that have undergone this process. They may provide valuable lessons that we in the Wikimedia movement can take advantage of, and we should be open to these outside perspectives as there may be parallels to our experiences, and they may have taken into consideration things that we may have overlooked."
}
},
"supaplex": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I am with this. From the outsiders perspective, we can easily know our own strength and weakness, and the possible solution for our struggles."
}
},
"superswift": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tangomikebravo": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"tarkowski": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "I strongly support both parts of this statement. Yes, in the process we should seek advice from best experts on creating global, democratic governance models - Wikimedia deserves this. And yes, the Charter should be consulted not only in the Movement but with partners from the broader free knowledge ecosystem."
}
},
"tgr": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "This seems like common sense."
}
},
"theland": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"theklan": {
"position": "reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "We know our movement better than any advicer outside it."
}
},
"titodutta": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Relevant expertise is important, specially from like-minded individuals/institutions. However they must not impose things on the community."
}
},
"unclebash": {
"position": "neutral",
"explanation": {
"en": "Am also not very sure here whether the charter should seek advice from other experts even though its a good thing to seek for more insight, but this may result to interruption in decision making, therefore I remain neutral."
}
},
"valentinnvj": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"vism": {
"position": "strongly-reject",
"explanation": {
"en": "No, experts from outsde of the movement always have a distorted view. Unless it is from Free and Open Movements, do not take any advice. Even Larry Sanger has been very much off on inputs to the Wikimedia movement. Outside advises are non-compatible with Wikimedia culture. If they were in any way close to our goals, they would already be part of some Wiki communities."
}
},
"yairrand": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "Somewhat, yes. We will require outside legal expertise (which must be, in particular, independent from the WMF) in order to assist with designing mechanisms to transfer responsibilities and authorities in a way that's effectively binding. Additionally, for some of the organizational structures we'll likely be putting together, I think it would be helpful to consult with those with expertise in similar endeavors."
}
},
"ybsenlucero": {
"position": "approve",
"explanation": {}
},
"zhongjuechen": {
"position": "strongly-approve",
"explanation": {
"en": "\"I think some of the statements are naive. Should we seek review and advice or not? Yes, of course, since we can just seek those adv ice, then ignore them if we don't like them. I wonder if those statements written in bureaucratic tones can be helpful to distinguish candidates. (About \"bureaucratic tones\", see the Statement 96.)\""
}
}
}
}
]
