Language capabilities (language and level of proficiency): en-5; fr-2
Regional experiences: Northern America (US and Canada); Northern and Western Europe
What experience do you have participating on committees, within or outside the Wikimedia movement?
I am the current Chair of the Affiliations Committee (AffCom), and I understand many of the opportunities and complexities affiliates face across our global Movement. I was a Member, of the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 Drafting Committee. During the period of the Wikimedia Movement Strategy, I served as an Integrator, Writer, and Co-Coordinator of the Capacity Building Working Group. In 2019 I was an Election Facilitator for the Affiliate-Selected Board Seats (ASBS) election. I am also a former member of the Project Grants Committee before the grants process shifted to the current model. All this work I shared is within the Wikimedia Movement.
What skills, experience, or perspective would you bring or contribute to the committee, if appointed?
I try to Assume Good Faith, and in working with the Conflicts Subcommittee in AffCom, I try to bring patience and a focus that people within the Movement overall want to do good.
Is there any other pertinent information that you would like us to take into account when reviewing your application?
Consistent with the conflict mitigation work I do on AffCom, I try to bring this to all my interactions across the various Wiki Projects I contribute to. As a result, I avoid editing conflicts as much as possible, as they rarely ever end in a good place for those involved.
Which sub-committee are you interested in working with (Conflict Intervention, Recognitions)?:
Conflict Intervention sub-committee
What do you think are the benefits and responsibilities of functioning as formal affiliates, and when is a group of Wikimedians ready to form an affiliate?
Formal affiliates have entered into a relationship with the Wikimedia Foundation and the Wikimedia Movement itself, and as a result, need to conduct themselves as an extension of our entire diverse community. They benefit by being listed on the Affiliations Committee page as a vetted and approved affiliate, along with the ability to apply for and receive grant funding while also engaging in representative voting in some ways for the Board of Trustees. Wikimedians are ready to form an affiliate when a group has gathered and has a clear vision for their community and how they want to further the shared goals of Knowledge as a Service and Knowledge Equity. This requires a commitment to their work and also a basic level of capability for self-governance (and possibly also fiscal responsibility if they seek to receive and manage funding).
Please describe your experience working with conflict resolution, and how you have helped build consensus and support diversity.
I serve as the current lead of AffCom's Conflicts Subcommittee, and I firmly believe that conflicts take more energy than resolving conflicts does. When we assume Good Faith, conflicts happen when people have different approaches to doing the good work we are all trying to do across the Movement and trying to resolve conflicts involves trying to identify a way forward that will at least minimally satisfy all involved through the process of give and take.
Strong oppose I strongly suspect that AffCom is violating the Wikimedia Foundation Guiding Principles for last at least 3 years. That suspection was big part of my reason to apply to AffCom, in fact. And FULBERT is part of that term of AffCom, so I am very careful. Generaly, I am not going to endorse anyone who applies for any role in WMF until they explicitly declare their commitment to the WMF Guiding Principles (even if implicit commitment may be clear, which in this case is not) or present a clear critique of them based on reasonable arguments and at least a basic proposal to improve the situation about the principles. If you answer my questions, I may change my endorsement. I strongly invite you to explicitly clarify your role in the suspected AffCom's violations (you can find a lot of examples in the AffCom mailinglist by searching something like "Do you consider that AffCom is aligned with WMF Guiding Principles"). Thanks for understanding, and I am very looking for your answer. --KuboF Hromoslav (talk) 22:53, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I met him at the recent WikiConference North America 2023 in Toronto. I think his engagement allows him to have a good understanding of what affiliates need. OhanaUnitedTalk page15:03, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support for the incumbent chair, because I think that organizational continuity is helpful. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:13, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Strong oppose I strongly suspect that AffCom is violating the Wikimedia Foundation Guiding Principles for last at least 3 years. That suspection was big part of my reason to apply to AffCom, in fact. And FULBERT is part of that term of AffCom, so I am very careful. Generaly, I am not going to endorse anyone who applies for any role in WMF until they explicitly declare their commitment to the WMF Guiding Principles (even if implicit commitment may be clear, which in this case is not) or present a clear critique of them based on reasonable arguments and at least a basic proposal to improve the situation about the principles. If you answer my questions, I may change my endorsement. I strongly invite you to explicitly clarify your role in the suspected AffCom's violations (you can find a lot of examples in the AffCom mailinglist by searching something like "Do you consider that AffCom is aligned with WMF Guiding Principles"). Thanks for understanding, and I am very looking for your answer. --KuboF Hromoslav (talk) 22:53, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Support I met him at the recent WikiConference North America 2023 in Toronto. I think his engagement allows him to have a good understanding of what affiliates need. OhanaUnitedTalk page 15:03, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
