Talk:Movement Charter

See also: Talk:Movement Charter (before 2022-11-01 UTC)

Draft chapters feedback

There is an ongoing Movement Charter Community Consultation. Below is a duplicate version of an anonymous feedback survey to participate, for those who may wish to fill it out publicly.

Paragraph 1

The Wikimedia movement is focused on developing, curating and expanding the global availability of free knowledge. The Wikimedia Movement Charter exists to define the Wikimedia movement, its core values and principles. It is a formal social agreement explaining the relationships between entities within the movement and their rights and responsibilities. This applies equally to both existing entities and those to be established.

Assessment & comments

Is this paragraph good enough for the Movement Charter draft? Please assess it on a scale of the following: strongly agree (good), agree, disagree or strongly disagree (not good)

• Agree: I have the ambition that the Preamble be concise and inspirational. Therefore I recommend to remove the present last sentence, "This applies equally to both existing entities and those to be established." To me that refers to a kind of legalism that can be put elsewhere. It is also not strictly necessary to constrain the future here; it might also not be treated as binding by future interpreters, since it's in the Preamble. Also the sentence subject is "This" which seems unclear; does that word refer to the Charter overall? I can't see what else it could mean. -- econterms (talk) 14:27, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
• Disagree with this paragraph and with the entirety of Movement Strategy, for a number of reasons:
  1. This is not a "movement." Nothing that anyone on any Wikimedia website is doing comes even close to other, real, movements, like the abolitionist movement, women's suffrage, or the civil rights movements. We are not freeing oppressed people. We are not changing life as we know it for anyone. The use of the word "movement" to describe what we're doing is either vapid marketingspeak (if you don't believe it but you think it sounds good for donations and such), or extremely arrogant (if you actually think this is a movement like the others).
  2. Even if it were a movement, movements don't have charters. Movements aren't directed by an elected body of people who get together and write a statement of governing principles that is then ratified by a vote of the members. That's called an "organization", not a "movement". Organizations have charters and mission statements and votes and the like--the WMF has them--but not movements. Real movements are grassroots, leaderless, nebulous, evolving, and organic. Indeed, that's why they're called "movements" and not "organizations". A defining feature of a movement is that it lacks organization. Wikimedia is an organization. There is no "free knowledge movement", there's just an organization hosting websites.
  3. Movement Strategy was voted on in 2017. So: most of the people who voted on it no longer actively volunteer, and most of the people who actively volunteer today did not vote on it. Five years is too long: if it takes five years to go from the vote to starting to draft the charter, it's just too long. We need to have another vote, and we should be having votes like every five years, because of turnover within the volunteer community.

I believe the Movement Charter and Movement Strategy and the very idea of "movement" is outdated and out of touch, and should be revisited by the current community, not the one from 5-10 years ago. I don't know if anyone else feels this way, but I do not belong to any movement. Levivich (talk) 19:09, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

• Agree. This is a preamble and it should contain who drafted the charter and not just who will raftify it or if the communities' agreement is included.Nada kareem22 (talk) 15:39, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Paragraph 2

The Charter exists with the agreement of the communities governed by it, through a formal ratification process. The Movement Charter applies to all members, entities and technical spaces within the Wikimedia movement, including but not limited to content contributors, projects, affiliates, and the Wikimedia Foundation.

Assessment & comments

Is this paragraph good enough for the Movement Charter draft? Please assess it on a scale of the following: strongly agree (good), agree, disagree or strongly disagree (not good)

• Agree.Nada kareem22 (talk) 15:42, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Paragraph 3

To achieve our focus, the movement has developed a wide range of knowledge repositories (“the projects”) in multiple languages with different focuses. The projects are largely self-governed, with respect to content creation and management, as well as community conduct. The movement also includes both organised and informal groups focused on specific matters or geographic regions. The role of these groups is to support the projects directly and indirectly.

Assessment & comments

Is this paragraph good enough for the Movement Charter draft? Please assess it on a scale of the following: strongly agree (good), agree, disagree or strongly disagree (not good)

• Disagree. I recommend sharper phrasing for brevity. I recommend to replace (a) "To achieve our focus, the" by "The"; (b) "with respect to content creation and management, as well as community conduct" by the simpler "with respect to content creation, management, and community conduct"; and (c) "support the projects directly and indirectly" by "support the projects". -- econterms, 14:36, 2 December 2022
• Disagree. I don't think that "largely self-governed" is appropriate since that there is rules that limits content management and there is a global ban policiy that is not initiated by the communities' projects. Also, the aspects of direct and indirect support should be included.Nada kareem22 (talk) 15:51, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Legal note

Any suggestions and specific phrasings that can capture the meaning while satisfying Legal’s concerns?

• ..

Paragraph 4

Supplementing these projects and groups is a comprehensive infrastructure with several roles. The infrastructure supports the technical needs of the movement. The infrastructure provides financial and other resources for ongoing development and retention of knowledge. The infrastructure endeavours to promote legal and regulatory environments that enable the movement, and the entities within it, to operate around the world. The infrastructure also supports content contributors, readers, and all others who are part of the global Wikimedia movement by promoting and advancing a safe and productive environment in which knowledge can be shared and consumed, where it is not feasible for a local project to do so itself. The nature and extent of the infrastructure support is limited by the movement’s values, resources, and restrictions imposed outside of the movement.

Assessment & comments

Is this paragraph good enough for the Movement Charter draft? Please assess it on a scale of the following: strongly agree (good), agree, disagree or strongly disagree (not good)

• ..

Paragraph 1

We represent a fact-based, open, and inclusive approach to knowledge. Our projects serve knowledge to a global audience, and the platforms that host the projects are driven by independent initiative. Our policies and everyday practices are guided by community values that empower all Wikimedians everywhere to be able to participate on a basis of equity.

Assessment & comments

Is this paragraph good enough for the Movement Charter draft? Please assess it on a scale of the following: strongly agree (good), agree, disagree or strongly disagree (not good)

• ..

Paragraph 2

Free knowledge and open source

We share, in the spirit of free knowledge, all of our content, all our software, all our platforms with the world, using the transformative tool of open licensing. We commit to making space for the knowledge that has historically been marginalized - including within our projects.

Assessment & comments

Is this paragraph good enough for the Movement Charter draft? Please assess it on a scale of the following: strongly agree (good), agree, disagree or strongly disagree (not good)

• Disagree. "We commit to making space for the knowledge that has historically been marginalized". This is highly problematic as it indicates that there is hidden agenda and targeted and designed content. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nada kareem22 (talk) 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Paragraph 3

Independence

We strive to operate independently, without any favoritism that would hinder our free knowledge mission. We are not driven by commercial, political or other monetary or promotional influences.

Assessment & comments

Is this paragraph good enough for the Movement Charter draft? Please assess it on a scale of the following: strongly agree (good), agree, disagree or strongly disagree (not good)

• Disagree. There are a lot of "We"s and "Our" in the charter and it doesn't say who are those.This collective speech denies individuality.Nada kareem22 (talk) 16:04, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Paragraph 4

Inclusivity

We foster a people-centered vision of participatory co-creation. Our projects are intended to be available in all languages, and accessible on diverse platforms by universal design and assistive technology. Our practices build on and safeguard the diversity and rights of our communities. To do so, we establish and enforce codes of conduct, and ensure that everyone feels valued and equally included.

Assessment & comments

Is this paragraph good enough for the Movement Charter draft? Please assess it on a scale of the following: strongly agree (good), agree, disagree or strongly disagree (not good)

• ..

Paragraph 5

Subsidiarity

We entrust authority to the most immediate or local level that is appropriate, on both our platforms and in our organizational governance. Thereby, we ensure a capable self-management and autonomy of communities that acts in accordance with the values of the global movement.

Assessment & comments

Is this paragraph good enough for the Movement Charter draft? Please assess it on a scale of the following: strongly agree (good), agree, disagree or strongly disagree (not good)

• Tentatively disagree: (a) This word is unusual in my experience. "Subsidiarity" seems to refers to a kind of "federalism" (a U.S. phrasing which I recognize more easily), meaning much authority is left to local/provincial/state governments. Would it be appropriate to say that "federalism" as a sort of synonym? Or have I misunderstood? (b) More importantly the second sentence would be sharper and clearer if it stated our intent. I recommend to change "Thereby, we ensure" to the simpler "We encourage". -- econterms (talk) 14:47, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
• Disagree. The relationship between the foundation and the communities needs more elaboration. It doesn't say if this "self-management" is absolute or unconditional.Nada kareem22 (talk) 16:09, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Paragraph 6

Equity

We empower and support communities through pragmatic decentralization and autonomy. Along with equity in the representation of knowledge, we enable equity of resources. We also enable equity of digital rights such as privacy to our users and all participants to the widest extent possible.

Assessment & comments

Is this paragraph good enough for the Movement Charter draft? Please assess it on a scale of the following: strongly agree (good), agree, disagree or strongly disagree (not good)

• Comment Can provide some more information on what is meant by Along with equity in the representation of knowledge, we enable equity of resources? BilledMammal (talk) 22:01, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

• @BilledMammal "Equity in the representation of knowledge" probably refers to representing different kinds of content on Wikimedia projects. Likely related to how the Knowledge Gaps Taxonomy attempts to find out current gaps in knowledge representation. "Enable equity of resources" probably refers to equitable sharing of funds from the Wikimedia Foundation (or any future entity that replaces it in this role) with Wikimedia affiliates and communities everywhere in the world. Let me know if you have had a different question in mind --Abbad (WMF) (talk) 14:16, 13 December 2022 (UTC).

Paragraph 7

Accountability

We hold ourselves accountable through the transparency of shared editable documentation where at all possible, public notice and reporting of programs and activities, and the prioritization of voices representing community leadership for the roles and responsibilities delineated in our charter.

Assessment & comments

Is this paragraph good enough for the Movement Charter draft? Please assess it on a scale of the following: strongly agree (good), agree, disagree or strongly disagree (not good)

• Disagree. The limitations on sharing documentation should be mentioned with specificity.Nada kareem22 (talk) 16:11, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Paragraph 8

Resilience

We thrive by innovation and experimentation, continually renewing the vision of what a platform for free knowledge can be. We pursue effective strategies and practices driven by evidence. We promote a culture of sustainability across our structures and communities.

Assessment & comments

Is this paragraph good enough for the Movement Charter draft? Please assess it on a scale of the following: strongly agree (good), agree, disagree or strongly disagree (not good)

• Agree. I like the spirit here, and I also think the statement is correct. I think it's important to incorporate the idea in the Preamble that we are engaged in a free/open-source software (FOSS) activity, and will follow the relevant principles and make partnerships with others in FOSS activities. This is a good place perhaps to put that idea, because this is so close already. Or perhaps it could be in another paragraph. I will think about how to phrase it. E.g.: We tolerate bold experimentation; and we will look to seize on ideas and implementations that work without battling too much over ownership/credit/priority/appropriation. Also that we think it is appropriate for the visionary creators of useful works to have some control over them temporarily at least. -- econterms (talk) 15:25, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Introduction section

This is only an "intentions statement", describing the intended content of the Roles & Responsibilities chapter of the Movement Charter.

With the draft below, the MCDC introduces its main intentions for the foundation of the Roles & Responsibilities chapter of the Movement Charter. This brief explanation, up to the actual intentions below, will not be part of the final version of the Movement Charter but is only intended as an explanation during the consultation processes.

The Roles and Responsibilities chapter will present an overview of the various roles and responsibilities within the Wikimedia Movement, and its division across involved stakeholders. We intend to engage with different stakeholders in the process of redefining and organizing the governance model for the Wikimedia Movement.

Overall, this chapter will define the adoption of our values and principles in practice. It will describe the distribution of roles and responsibilities for entities across the Wikimedia Movement, including the suggested but unexplored structures of Global Council and Hubs.

The Movement Charter will be written in simple English to provide a low entry barrier to the complexity of our ecosystem.

It is important to note, that the Movement Charter Drafting Committee does not have a decision making power by itself, but once the Movement Charter is formally ratified, it will redefine our governance structure. The exact ratification process is yet to be determined.

Assessment & comments

Is this paragraph good enough for the Movement Charter draft? Please assess it on a scale of the following: strongly agree (good), agree, disagree or strongly disagree (not good)

• ..

Introduction section

The Roles & Responsibilities chapter will be based on the following intentions:

1. As the Wikimedia Movement has changed over the last 20 years, the committee understands that roles and responsibilities need to evolve accordingly. They also need to provide space for future growth, adjustment and innovation.
2. This chapter will provide an overview of the Wikimedia Movement and will introduce two new entities: Hubs and the Global Council. The chapter will also introduce and define the mandates of these new entities, when and where they seem fit. The committee will provide clarity of structure, functions, hierarchy and interactions for all stakeholders. :We will work to come to a common agreement for a Hubs definition, taking into account the on-going pilots and community perspectives. Considering the anticipated stature of the Global Council, there will be a dedicated chapter in the Movement Charter.
3. The roles and responsibilities that currently exist in the Wikimedia Movement may be modified, in part or whole. While doing this, the MCDC will review the previous work by the Movement Strategy 2030 working groups, as well as other relevant resources.
4. Our Movement is constantly evolving. The MCDC will consider alternative governance structures and their potential for future applications.
5. The MCDC will propose new roles and responsibilities for the Movement, fill identified gaps and aim for decentralization and subsidiarity.

Assessment & comments

Is this paragraph good enough for the Movement Charter draft? Please assess it on a scale of the following: strongly agree (good), agree, disagree or strongly disagree (not good)

• ..

Acknowledgement

Thank you, @Econterms, for the good feedback! Acknowledging here that this is a public version of the feedback survey that allows transparent sharing for those who wish (and, hopefully, for more interaction with it). This page is being monitored and will inform the Movement Charter Drafting Committee when refining the drafts. When publishing the refined drafts, we'll also be documenting the exact changes taking place based on the feedback --Abbad (WMF) (talk) 10:52, 5 December 2022 (UTC).

Feedback deadline is 18 December

Thank you for all the feedback! This is an acknowledgement that all comments here are being monitored. A summary of them is being compiled and will be shared back here in January 2023. The MCDC will refer to the same summary when refining this draft and others early in the new year. As a reminder and as mentioned in the community consultations page, the deadline for this round of consultations is 18 December, so please share your feedback by then. There will also be more feedback opportunities in 2023! Abbad (WMF) (talk) 13:16, 14 December 2022 (UTC)