Grants talk:APG/Complaints about the FDC process/Archives/Complaint to FDC Ombudsman about FDC process with respect to CIS-A2K proposal

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Hi wikimedia movement in India and elsewhere,

While a more formal response will come through the formal complaint process, I would like to informally address one comment that could lead to a misunderstanding in the broader community and outside world about the way that the FDC evaluates and deliberates on proposals.

As the relative amount requested is small compared to major European chapters, it has been my experience that FDC devotes proportionately less time for review/discussion.

As a member of FDC without any conflict of interest due to an affiliation, I've been a part of every discussion about every proposal for the past 3 years. So, I have a good sense for the amount of time that is spend evaluating and deliberating about each proposal, and reasons for spending more time on some proposals.

From my perspective, the two main reasons for more in depth evaluation of a proposal are 1) the complexity of the proposal, and 2) concerns about gaps in information that need to be resolved. And the two main reasons for longer deliberations about a proposal are 1) the complexity of the proposal, and 2) the amount of initial disagreement from the members of the FDC about the amount funds to be allocated.

It is true that the monetary amount of the proposal request can influence the amount of time spend on a proposal, but only because larger requests are typically from organizations with larger and more complex programs and organizational structures than need more time for review.

So, although the monetary amount of the CIS request is smaller than some European chapters, because the CIS proposal is complex, it received a significant amount of evaluation and deliberations prior to the FDC deciding on an amount to allocate. A large part of the reason that the CIS proposal is complex is because of the large number of language communities in India, and the need to consider that impact that the programs will have for each community.

Since the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustee representatives to the FDC who are also receiving this complaint sat in as observers for the deliberations, they are aware of the amount of time that was spent discussing the CIS proposal, and also the type of topics that were considered. They can convey their opinions to the full Board of Trustees and the Ombudsman about whether community opinions were given adequate weight in the deliberations and recommendation.

Although there may be disagreement about the level of funding recommended, hopefully, my comments will reassure the local communities in India and the broader wikimedia movement that the FDC spent more than an adequate amount of time reflecting on the CIS proposal before making a recommendation to the WMF Board.

This is my reflection after serving on the FDC for 3 years, not an official FDC response. Other people on the FDC can also offer their own thoughts. Sydney Poore/FloNight (talk) 18:21, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]