Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees/Call for feedback: Community Board seats/Conversations/Topic panels/Topic panel: Regional diversity/Report
2021-03-14 Topic panel: Regional diversity on the Call for Feedback
- The conversation will run on Sunday, March 14, 13:00 UTC to
- Number of participants : 40
The panel discussed points related to the urgency of having true regional diversity in the board seats, treating diversity as a skill, and how to implement it even hypothetically thinking. The definition of being from a certain region was discussed, as well as to which level should they be aware of their region and community. "Who shall be voting if we will go for regional seats" has been discussed as well.
- Anass Sedrati talked about the background of the idea of the regional seat, he explained that people coming from the specific region will make you see things from a different angle and should bring a new diverse perspective to the board.
- Bishaka is in favor of having regional diversity because usually in Elections we don't end up with regional diversity. It should be seen as a specialization itself.
- Dariusz emphasized that regional diversity should be treated as a skill because we need people who understand the context and understand the community. He thinks the problem is that we need to apply it to all the board not only the community seats.
- Nanour suggested that we can have 3 regional seats for 3 defined regions in the Global South. we need to make sure the candidates from these regions are eligible.
- Ivan said solutions are always complicated but it's necessary to have this diversity, the main problem is that we need this to be implemented in a single moment because we have a complex situation in the movement. We don't aspire to solve it all for now but at least we can take small steps in the way of achieving that diversity.
- Bishaka asked if there is a strong understanding that geographical specialization is lacking, wouldn't make sense to commit to one seat at least?
- Anas explained that we will face some location privacy, most people would love to vote anonymously, so we should answer the question of how would we answer the question of how we define if someone's from a specific region? living in the region or originally from the region? and all related questions.
- Dariusz stated that someone who lives as an example in a totalitarian regime would know for sure how daily life is? what obstacles and problems need to be dealt with? of course if you are an oppositionist who needed to leave escaping from that regime, you will have that knowledge and experience by default.
- Ivan suggested that we can go forward to talk about hypothetical situations, but in order to have an action for upcoming elections, we can search for profiles from existing initiatives because we can get attraction from existing supporters of the movement. He knows that this is not the perfect case but it's more realistic for the current time frame.
- Bishaka stated that she struggling with the question of if we will be hypothetically having a global south seat, why would we need any additional criteria?
Open mic discussion
- There has been a suggestion to organize two elections - open and underrepresented. An open election will happen first, where everyone can participate, irrespective of their regions. There has to be a list of underrepresented regions, and people can for those seats in the subsequent year. If there's someone from Southeast Asia who wins in the first election, then we take Southeast Asia off the list of underrepresented regions for the second election because they're not underrepresented anymore.
- A participant suggested keeping the system flexible, and the Board should define current gaps in the geographically that it needs to fill in. Like we say technology expertise, it can then be said that expertise is for geography, minority languages, ethnicity etc. The filters should be simple and affiliates can be considered for endorsing candidates, if they can or cannot represent a region, or probably the community.
- A participant shared their concern that too many additional requirements are being imposed only on a candidate who will run for the diversity seat or a geographical specialisation. There has to be equity among candidates, and candidates running for these specific positions should not have more burden of fulfilling ten other things than what a general candidate does.
- Having some preference for people with some experience in countries that are not in the top twenty democracies would be helpful. Understanding how systems of oppressions is helpful. People who come from non-democratic countries and nevertheless are passionate about Wikimedia can help to teach us a lot about what we can do better and protect people from regions where using Wikipedia/Wikimedia is forbidden.
- Participants suggested that people should not be forced to use a regional seat even if they are eligible for it. It should be left to the choice of the candidate whether to run in an open election or for the regional seat. A suggestion was to open elections where everyone can participate, and if someone eligible hasn’t been able to make it to the top, there would be another round of elections for regional seats alone.
- A participant said that having excellent English language proficiency as a requirement on the Board, is a barrier for many underrepresented regions. In many Global South countries, people who can speak good English are the ones from privileged backgrounds. So the Board should consider supporting candidates who don’t have excellent English skills, but skill brings the knowledge and the expertise required.
- There is generally support that the Board should have some mechanisms to encourage and ensure regional diversity. It is important to discuss the next steps. Three questions have been raised:
- How many seats, and how will that decision be made?
- The definition of regions - global south, continents, regional groups etc.
- Who is responsible for all this - the elections committee, the facilitation team or the Board?
- How can it be done in a way that the process gives these seats the best possible credibility within the movement? So that they are not sort of seen as “lesser” seats or leading to hierarchies between seats.
- Skills, experience, and diversity should be treated equally, and all these factors should not be considered for community seats alone, but also for appointed seats. It is not the case where the appointed seats have been doing great in terms of diversity, and only the community side needs to be fixed, so the criteria needs to be equally applied for both appointed and community seats.
Copied from https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/CfF_Regional_diversity_panel, Version 736 Saved March 14, 2021
- Bishaka: Consider the regional diversity of candidates as a knowldge or skill about that culture or region, and not just as something for diversity's sake
- Nanour : we are here to decide : yes the regional seat are important to reach the diversity.
- Anass : why do we need this person, why we need this regional diversity ?
- Dariusz : we need to understanding why give privilege to theeses persons we need specefic skill - it's not about nationality
- Ivan : this model is not perfect
- sandra : what's the main criteria if we are going the this model
- Nanour : We should define the geographical part to represent / evaluation form need to contain more details and to define the eligibility
- Knipel : we can be based on GDP - Global south - Africa - Asia but it's not easy
- Mykola : the situation can change year after year - we need a flexible process to define where are the curent gap, and the board can agree the particular expertise for each situation.
- we can forexamlpe require a special region this time .
- I think we have this kind of selection . i'm not sure if it's a perfect system.
- Ivan: we need to consider all aspects of the call for applications: not just regional diversity.
- gender diversity + language skills + skill experiences are all needed.
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga 6:27 PM Etherpad: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/CfF_Regional_diversity_panel
Denis Barthel 6:28 PM The best shirt EVER!
Dariusz Jemielniak 6:28 PM definitely one of the top ones!
Christoph J 6:28 PM Hi everyone :)
Dariusz Jemielniak 6:29 PM one of my favorite ones is "Wikipedia is accurate  (citation needed)"
Christoph J 6:29 PM i want stroopwaffel-crumbles ...
but IN MY MOUTH :D
Denis Barthel 6:30 PM And some dubbele vla to drink with it ...
- 6:31 PM record start Ravan, stop please, wait till recording will start. ok
Mohammed Bachounda 6:31 PM use t https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/CfF_Regional_diversity_panel
Jan-Bart de Vreede 6:32 PM Bishakha! SO good to see you!
Dariusz Jemielniak 6:33 PM ditto
Paulo Perneta 6:33 PM now I understood that "-" is the recording technician 😶
Bishakha Datta 6:33 PM Ditto! Joy to see y'all.
Paulo Perneta 6:35 PM hey Francesc! 👋
Francesc Fort 6:35 PM Hi everyone
Mohammed Bachounda 6:35 PM hi Francesc
Paulo Perneta 6:36 PM Good morning Chico
nada elfarra 6:36 PM Hi everyone
Chico Venancio 6:36 PM /me waves
Paulo Perneta 6:36 PM hi nada
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga 6:39 PM Etherpad: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/CfF_Regional_diversity_panel
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga 6:41 PM The first 45 min of session will be a discussion among the panelists, and we will have the last 45 min for open mic.
Dariusz Jemielniak 6:42 PM Bishakha - are you saying that there should be ONE seat out of 6, and this 1 seat should serve increasing geo diversity?
asking for clarity.
Richard Knipel 6:42 PM It's a question of practicality too, there isn't really any way to determine where voters are from.We can only really do it for candidates.
Bishakha Datta 6:44 PM That's what I was trying to say Dariusz - treat geographical specialization as a skill, rather than as something separate.
Richard Knipel 6:45 PM the current appointed board members are 100% based in the USA
Paulo Perneta 6:45 PM "geographical specialization" in a specific region? If so, which region?
Richard Knipel 6:45 PM the elected members are rather more geographically diverse currently
Jan-Bart de Vreede 6:46 PM someone mentioned yesterday that you could have a staggered election, so you have a first election and identify what you are missing for a second round?
Quim Gil 6:46 PM (Everyone: note that you can "Turn on captions" if they are useful)
Mykola Kozlenko 6:46 PM Esra'a is not quite USA
Chico Venancio 6:47 PM ha! Thanks for the pointer Quim.
- 6:47 PM +1 Dariusz
Dariusz Jemielniak 6:47 PM Mykola: I said that Esra'a IS NOT a Westerner
Richard Knipel 6:49 PM I agree dedicated regional seats is a better conception than "quota"
Dariusz Jemielniak 6:49 PM I'm 46, so for me the division East - West has a political connotation: American and Western Europe nukes were aimed at my home city :)
it is not about actual West and East (think East Germany vs Finland)
Richard Knipel 6:49 PM it's not helpful to call them a "type of quota"
Mykola Kozlenko 6:50 PM @Dariusz that was to Richard's "the current appointed board members are 100% based in the USA"
Dariusz Jemielniak 6:50 PM a fixed reserved seat for the Global South makes a lot of sense
Christoph J 6:50 PM @Dariusz the division East - West is so hard to make in Germany :)
Dariusz Jemielniak 6:51 PM @Christoph - yeah :) a rare example of a relatively successful union.
Richard Knipel 6:51 PM I made a proposal earlier for 1 regional seat for Africa, and 2 regional seats for Asia
Dariusz Jemielniak 6:52 PM @Richard - the thing is that the appointed seats should finally be more actively sourced globally, too. Otherwise there is a risk of "the experts" vs "the quota seats"
Steven M 6:53 PM Hi there everyone
Mohammed Bachounda 6:53 PM just folow the https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/CfF_Regional_diversity_panelyou can edit
Steven M 6:53 PM Terrific
anass sedrati 6:54 PM +1 Bishakha
Richard Knipel 6:54 PM Dariusz - certainly, I mean only that it's a mistake for the WMF to say that democracy is an oppositional value to diversity
Jan-Bart de Vreede 6:54 PM Appointed seats should not be regarded as "expert" seats, but seats that allow the board to select candidates to increase the diversity on any criteria, including cultural knowledge or any missing skill (arguably the community members are the experts ;)
Richard Knipel 6:54 PM we need more democracy AND more diversity
Andrew Lih 6:55 PM I like this Framing of knowledge about a culture/Lang/region is not just diversity but a skill
Chico Venancio 6:56 PM +1 to Ivan's point. We need to also think how to evolve and amend the solutions initially adopted.
Paulo Perneta 6:56 PM (keeping in mind that that diversity is not -yet - generally reflected at the online communities. Quite far from that, actually)
Steven M 6:56 PM As long as this is presented to the general wikipedia community, to get consensus, that would be good.
Chico Venancio 6:58 PM + 1 to global instead of regional elections.
Dariusz Jemielniak 6:58 PM I'd also add that the diversity we should be looking for should rely on a combination of criteria:
1. outside of top 20 GDP per capita
2. outside of top 20 countries with freedom of press
3. outside of top 20 countries in human rights rankings
Mykola Kozlenko 6:59 PM we currently have 2 affiliate seats, can we perhaps keep 2 'global' affiliate seats and add +1 'regional' affiliate seat with a region defined some time in advance?
Richard Knipel 6:59 PM It's not just GDP, where are the board members from Japan?
Mykola Kozlenko 6:59 PM say, board + affiliates identified 2-3 months before the election that this year we have a Latin America gap
Richard Knipel 6:59 PM (and that's a country with relatively high human rights too)
sandra hanbo 6:59 PM What are the main criteria to look for if we want to go for regional ?? Are continents? Or languages?
Also What about other skills needed for being in the board?
Chico Venancio 7:00 PM Dariusz: Won't those criteria (except GDP) create a problem for us to define the rankings? There is a lot of subjectivity in these assessments.
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:00 PM @Richard: Japan is a super peculiar case, we do not have many Wikimedians active in the community
anass sedrati 7:01 PM @Dariusz - When you mention countries, do you mean people living in the countries? Or having knowledge about them?
Also how do we consider an immigrant for example? Or a long-term resident?
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:01 PM @Chico: maybe, but there is always subjectivity in classifications
Mykola Kozlenko 7:01 PM you mean Guy Kawasaki?
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:01 PM how do we define the Global South? As I said, Mexico is technically in Northern America
Chico Venancio 7:01 PM @Dariusz: yes, but subjectivity with electoral impacts is usually a problem.
Mykola Kozlenko 7:01 PM and Ukraine is technically Global South, by the way
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:01 PM @anass: I'd say people who have been encultured long enough to understand the context.
Richard Knipel 7:01 PM having an Japanese surname does not make someone from the Japanese community at all
Mykola Kozlenko 7:02 PM (which makes +1 GS board member)
Denis Barthel 7:02 PM Extended version as heard in many conversations: how to avoid privileged countries in some regions outrank other countries of the same region?
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:02 PM @anass: someone who was born in China but migrated to the US and spent the last 50 years there, would definitely bring SOME valuable understanding of context, but less than someone who lives there
Richard Knipel 7:02 PM CEE and Iberocoop have been relatively well represented under the current board system, not as much Asia and Africa
Paulo Perneta 7:03 PM "Global South" has always been quite a problematic expression
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:03 PM @Chico: one way or another, you have to choose the counties. I'd be reluctant only to rely on the GDP.
anass sedrati 7:04 PM @Dariusz, yes true. But someone living in a totalitarian country will not be as open about freedom of speech an human rights, especially coming back home after a conference in USA I believe :D
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:04 PM I think it is not as much about "representing" as it is about "bringing the understanding to the table"
Paulo Perneta 7:04 PM @Richard Iberocoop is not a good example of a regional association
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:05 PM @anass: does it mean we should not invite people from totalitarian regimes? )
Paulo Perneta 7:05 PM for starters, Brazil, which encompasses 1/3 of the population of the region, is not there
Richard Knipel 7:05 PM I think it's simplest to just do people in the region, we want the criteria to be clear
Wafiq Aqil 7:06 PM Maybe depends on the communities in the region?
Chico Venancio 7:06 PM Anass: Touched on an important point. We need to be very careful to not exacerbate or create conflicts in the communities in the regions that will have seats. General elections, instead of regional, will probably help, but we still need to watch the process for problems and act on this.
anass sedrati 7:07 PM @Dariusz - of course we should, but we need also to (1) protect them and (2) see how they can share information without creating problems for them
Richard Knipel 7:08 PM I think better not to have such vague categories
Mykola Kozlenko 7:08 PM it seems much simpler to implement a regional seat for an affiliate seat: we have an affiliate endorsement filter, and we can perfectly set this filter for specific affiliates endorsements (e.g. for an African seat you need an endorsement from an African affiliate)
Jan-Bart de Vreede 7:09 PM yeah that makes sense(IMHO)
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:09 PM Regional representatives need to have a good awareness of all the issues within their region
Paulo Perneta 7:09 PM Mykola: that coule bring on very weird dynamics, since each affiliate has their own interests
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:09 PM sorry for taking so much time! I'll shut up more, I promise :)
Chico Venancio 7:09 PM @Mykola: and who votes?
anass sedrati 7:09 PM Let Ivan and Bishakha go before me :)
Richard Knipel 7:09 PM Mykola: yes, this could work, and mightkeep out for example, someone like me if I moved to Cape Town or Bangkok
Mohsen S 7:09 PM lol
Mykola Kozlenko 7:10 PM @Chico as we discussed above: everyone
@Richard or this may include you if WM South Africa thinks you are experienced enough in African context
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:11 PM @anass - 1. protect, absolutely, also understand the needs. Even things like reimbursements for expenses can be super frustrating if not done right. 2. yes, agreed.
Richard Knipel 7:11 PM yes, indeed, it could include someone like me if they judged I was involved enough in African context, but not if I wasn't
Chico Venancio 7:11 PM @mykola: I got confused with the mention of an affiliate seat. I agree with using affiliates as endorsements.
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:12 PM The other challenge is that most of our Wikimedia spaces are separated by language and not geography
Mykola Kozlenko 7:12 PM @Chico I assume that we keep affiliate seats, where each affiliate can vote
Chico Venancio 7:12 PM /me nods
Ivan Martínez 7:12 PM +1 Bishakha point
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:12 PM @Bishakha - yes, the question is hoq to selet the countries, I think
Jan-Bart de Vreede 7:12 PM Hmmm Ivan triggered something else... maybe it is futile to try to create an airtight system to make sure you get this diversity, you might want to change a LOT of small things to promote that diversity.... from candidate support to ?????
anass sedrati 7:13 PM @Dariusz - Even reimbursement is complex. Imagine someone from a country that USA impose sanctions to. It is problematic (too advanced for now, but just to give context)
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:13 PM @Bishakha - it is not JUST about the per capita income, imho
Nanour Garabedian 7:13 PM Thank you Ravan
Bishakha Datta 7:13 PM Yes, agree it's not just about the income
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:13 PM @anass I don't need to imagine it, I've worked with issues exactly like this :)
You 7:13 PM o/
Mykola Kozlenko 7:13 PM @Anass I believe a person from a US-sanctioned country/region cannot even serve on a US org board
Quim Gil 7:13 PM Español
Ivan Martínez 7:13 PM +1 Rachel, that is one of the main challenges in my region. Spanish Wikipedia have a variety of very different countries due to colonial heritage
anass sedrati 7:13 PM (((
Ravan Al-Taie 7:14 PM Arabic
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:14 PM @anass: what I'm saying is that I agree with you that the current system presumes certain procedures which work well for well-off Westerners
Denis Barthel 7:14 PM German
Mehman Ibragimov 7:14 PM Russian
anass sedrati 7:14 PM @Dariusz - Agreed :)
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:15 PM WMF board can be like UN representation if we want it to be so
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:15 PM The criteria - I totally agree it is crucial
Mykola Kozlenko 7:15 PM @Rachel I am pretty sure that's what the Global Council is for
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:15 PM I think we should define the privileged regions and exclude them, basing on GDP per capita, freedom of speech and democracy
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:16 PM @Darius in some countries those statistics really do not apply to everyone
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:16 PM if a country is in top20 in any of these areas, it should not be included
Paulo Perneta 7:16 PM +1 rachel, that's very true
Mykola Kozlenko 7:16 PM well, Jamaica is #6 in freedom of speech, but I don't think a Jamaican board member is useless
Richard Knipel 7:16 PM I don't think we should be excluding countries just because they are democracies :)
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:17 PM @Rachel: as I said - Gini index could be also considered Richard - why?
sandra hanbo 7:17 PM What I am saying we need to be specific when we are making criteria
Paulo Perneta 7:17 PM ahahah +1 Richard
Mykola Kozlenko 7:17 PM +1 Richard :)
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:17 PM @Richard - if a country is in top20 coutries in terms of human rights / established democracies, the chance that a person from them will actually understand the problems that the other 160 countries experiences is lower.
Richard Knipel 7:17 PM bad incentive for one, also there are many underrepresented and less wealthy democracies like Jamaica as Mykola says
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:17 PM We could have a very active Wikipedian in our country from a very poor urban or rural area, or a Native American reservation...and those statistics do not apply to them
Denis Barthel 7:18 PM Nanour your hand is (still) raised?
Paulo Perneta 7:18 PM @Dariusz excluding democracies = promoting non democracies in Wikimedia. Is this what you want?
Denis Barthel 7:18 PM )
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:18 PM Jamaica is unlikely to be in top20 of human rights / democracy
@Paulo - I postulate excluding the absolute top20 from well established democracies, yes
Paulo Perneta 7:19 PM +1 rachel, again
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:19 PM @Paulo - as I believe the Board should have people who understand how life looks like in 160 countries that are not as lucky
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:20 PM +1 to the statement being made now about privilege
Mykola Kozlenko 7:20 PM Uruguay is a good example of a country high in all democracy / freedom / human rights ratings, but clearly Global South
Ivan Martínez 7:20 PM +1 Annas, so true
Paulo Perneta 7:20 PM @Dariusz you understand that someone from a non democratic country has very limited liberty of expression on the BoT, right?
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:20 PM 23 countries are considered "full democracies" in this index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index
@Mykola: define "clearly", please.Nanour Garabedian 7:21 PM and contributors that have a so limited access to internet and still use it to contribute in one of the projects
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:22 PM The main thing is that the regional representatives selected for the board need to have a global outlook as well as be able to communicate the needs of Wikimedians in their region. They need to be aware of the systems of oppression, technical issues, etc in their region that they represent as well.
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:22 PM @Rachel - sure! But trust me, someone who was never afraid that what they say can put their family to jail really sees stuff differently than "being aware" based on books.
sandra hanbo 7:23 PM I agree @Mykola
Rachmat W. 7:23 PM +1 Mykola
sandra hanbo 7:24 PM We need to combine between skills and regional diversity needs
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:24 PM @Mykola: endorsements from affiliates HEAVILY promote activists over regular community members
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:25 PM Also while we all come with our biases, what has the potential WMF board member done with marginalized communities in their region? Is that person from a marginalized community within their region? Very important.
And all of the board members should be paid for their work.
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:25 PM @Rachel agreed with the first point, the second - I disagree, payment changes the profile of people running
Mohammed Bachounda 7:26 PM https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/CfF_Regional_diversity_panel
Paulo Perneta 7:26 PM @Dariusz many of us that are now democracies were born or lived in ditactorships as well 🤷🏽♂️ also, you don't need to sleep in the field to understand about agriculture 🤷🏽♂️(me included, BTW)
Mykola Kozlenko 7:26 PM @Dariusz is that necessarily a bad thing?
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:26 PM @Paulo - agreed, that's definitely something worh considering (actual experience vs. where the country is today)
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:26 PM It is too much labor to serve on the board to do it for free, specially if you are a single parent or not working
Chico Venancio 7:27 PM >payment changes the profile of people running
That's also a good thing! Having only people who can afford the time to run and serve on the board may not be the best thing for out movement.
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:27 PM @Mykola - yes, if we want diversity in the sense of different ways of engaging with the movement
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:27 PM +1 Chico
- 7:27 PM What about regional criteria about excluding all regions wikimedia Foundation already presented by its affiliates and focusing on candidates to the board from regions not yet presented by any WMF affiliate?
It would definitely add diversion to the board towards regional criteria and exclude duplicating affiliate-presented BoT members selection process.
Mykola Kozlenko 7:27 PM it might be better to have a 'regional diversity' representative who is already a community activist
Ivan Martínez 7:28 PM + 1 Chico - volunteer work in my context is a matter of privileged people who have additional time
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:28 PM @Rachel - it is a lot of work and only privileged people can afford it. I'd say that a way to provide a stipend to some trustees could work (rather than salary).
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:28 PM If there is a stipend for board membership guaranteed more women, LGBTQ+ folx, and folx from the countries we want to participate will do so
- 7:28 PM diversion = diversity
Richard Knipel 7:28 PM if someone is running for the board, they are by definition already an activist :)
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:28 PM Yes Darius—a stipend It is too much work to do for free
anass sedrati 7:29 PM @- I disagree. Some affiliates are powerful chapters will millions in funds, others are user groups with volunteer meeting once a year at most. We cannot put the at the same table
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:29 PM @Mykola - community activist are not the only valuable community active members, I hope we agree here :)
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:29 PM 20+ hours a week at least when in a leadership position in this movement
Richard Knipel 7:29 PM on yesterday's call, a past board member mentioned spending personal $ for childcare while travelling for board meetings
Ivan Martínez 7:29 PM I think we actually have great profiles outside "Western" contexts that are heavy Wikipedians, heavy Wikimedians also "activists" in their contexts
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:29 PM +1 Richard +1 Ivan
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:30 PM @Rachel - it is not 20 hours a week, more like 6-8 at top
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:30 PM Depends on the group and the work they are doing Darius
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:30 PM @Richard - yes, happened to me as well
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:30 PM When you have a small group individuals do more
- 7:30 PM @Anass, that's exactly their weakness - their "power" makes them blind to other persons' problems.
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:30 PM @Rachel I'm talking specifically about the board
Richard Knipel 7:30 PM Dariusz - has the chilcare policy not yet changed?
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:31 PM Still—should get some $$$ for service on the board
anass sedrati 7:31 PM @-: but it is only big chapters that have power, not all affiliates. So why exclude all affiliates?
- 7:31 PM @Anass, also, as I said - for affiliates there's affiliate-seats exists.
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:31 PM @Richard I don't know, in general I don't see reimbursements as salaries
Mykola Kozlenko 7:31 PM @Dariusz which is why we currently have two avenues to get elected to the board, and that works quite well. It is just next to impossible to qualify online contributors by geography, but it is easy to do by affiliate
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:31 PM +1 Mykola
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:31 PM @RIchard so to me it is fundamentally different to pay someone or just to reimburse them for valid expenses (and childcare should qualify, just as good itnernet)
Richard Knipel 7:32 PM I think we are looking at 1-3 regional seats, if we keep other categories
Bishakha Datta 7:32 PM Thanks Richard
Adel Nehaoua 7:32 PM La représentation par région est idée géniale
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:32 PM @Mykola I see your point, the practicalities are tough
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:32 PM Some affiliate groups are global and do not represent a geographical region (Wikimedia LGBT+ for example)
- 7:33 PM @Anass, because we are talking about additional (new) type of seats. Affiliates are already presented at the BoT. So why we have to raise in in the cost of new type seats?
Paulo Perneta 7:33 PM "for affiliates there's affiliate-seats exists." -> I don't think this is granted anymore, in the new system
Adel Nehaoua 7:33 PM Il faut définir les critères de limitation géographique
Mykola Kozlenko 7:34 PM Uruguay is higher in democracy ratings than the US :)
- 7:34 PM @Paulo, does anyone change whole BoT seats system? Why do you think (already existing) affiliate seats have no future?
anass sedrati 7:34 PM @-: Because affiliate seats was only open to chapters before last elections. USer groups just discovered it in 2018. so even small user groups are in weak positions compared to them (and those elected are "no surprise" from chapters :))
Paulo Perneta 7:35 PM @- Yes, I understand the whole thing has changed since last year, and affiliate seats are not granted anymore
Adel Nehaoua 7:35 PM Je trouve de garder une ou deux sièges n'entrave pas les autres communautés
Paulo Perneta 7:35 PM at least it's one of the things being discussed now, I understand
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:35 PM @Mykola - yes, so? I think it is safe to assume that a person from Uruguway may understand less what stalinism worked like and why, than a person from Belarus :)
Mykola Kozlenko 7:36 PM I mean that there is no perfect rating
Bishakha Datta 7:36 PM Does regional seat mean that someone from that region cannot run in a general seat? This is an important point that Nanour has raised.
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:36 PM @Nanour - excellent point, the appointed seats are often excluded from the diversity conversation (and the should not be)
anass sedrati 7:37 PM @Bishakha - no it should not
Paulo Perneta 7:37 PM @Bishakha that's a complete no-no for me. Everyone must be allowed to run globally instead of regionally
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:37 PM @Mykola - there is no one perfect rating, but making sure we take into account the GDP, democracy, human rights, freedom of speech is possible
Richard Knipel 7:37 PM we have seen a lot of false claims that appointed seats are more diverse, when by many measurements the oopposite is the case
Jan-Bart de Vreede 7:37 PM Originally the affiliate seats were supposed to be a way to find board members who were not able/willing to be elected through regular elections. so that was a measure to increase board diversity. It worked to some degree... but now that there are a lot of affiliates it has become more like the general election. You could think of something similar for cultural diversity... can we think of affiliates of structures that can accurately find and select board candidates that bring cultural diversity
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:37 PM @Richard has anyone made that claim really?
Mykola Kozlenko 7:38 PM I see it as a double-ballot. We have a general ballot with all candidates and a separate ballot with 'specific region' candidates
Richard Knipel 7:38 PM yes, Katherine has
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:38 PM @Jan-Bart - that's valuable historical context, thanks
Bishakha Datta 7:39 PM Paulo, I agree.
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:39 PM @anass - a whole system is being discussed, including the affiliate seats (and possible changes).
- 7:39 PM @Anass if already affiliate-presented communities' candidates will be excluded they will not available to vote for any their candidate and they have to choose from "low numbered group" candidate. That way there will be no pushing of "their exactly" candidate that obviously usually happens.
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:39 PM the written in stone assumption is a majority of community-sources seas
Richard Knipel 7:40 PM Dariusz - it's only 50% from communty
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:40 PM @Richard yes, Jimmy is considered to be more from the community than external experts by some
anass sedrati 7:40 PM @Dariusz - Thank you for the clarification
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:41 PM @Bishakha - a great question!
Francesc Fort 7:41 PM Whould be easier just to have general-free elections but have restrictions to be sure that the most voted candidate from every region is chosen, even if that means leaving somebody more voted but from an overepresented region?
Same for gender.
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:41 PM Someone can run for more than one position if they are qualified yes?
Mykola Kozlenko 7:41 PM I would actually suggest running on both seats simultaneously
- 7:42 PM +1 to Anass speech if we talking about GLOBAL (whole 10-16 seats) s/election process but -1 to Anass if we talking about 3 additional new-typed seats when affiliate seats already had place. Affiliated communities still will have a right to vote, just won't have their own candidates for exactly theses 3 new typed seats.
Paulo Perneta 7:42 PM @Dariusz - just for double clarification, affiliate seats are not granted at this point, correct?
Željko Blaće 7:42 PM +1
Adel Nehaoua 7:43 PM +1 pour Anas
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:43 PM @Paulo: granted?@Richard interesting idea!
anass sedrati 7:43 PM @-: The thing is that we are not sure that affiliate seats will remain (according to what I understood)
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:43 PM I'd say that we should also take into account the nominated seats (what countries they represent)
- 7:44 PM @Paulo, but we stilll telling about 3 new-typed only seats, as I wrote above about Anass speech - I'm not agree (with you and him) but agreed vice-versa
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:44 PM @Mykola - how about the question Bishakha asked?
Paulo Perneta 7:45 PM @Dariusz granted = not in discussion
Richard Knipel 7:45 PM Dariusz, perhaps, but appointed people from a country are often quite different from elected people from the same country
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:45 PM @Paulo - I think there is a discussion about the whole system revamp. All seats
@Richard - sure, but we really don't want 90% of people from N America (in my view being different because of the form of election does not qualify as diversity enough)
Paulo Perneta 7:46 PM @Dariusz thanks
- 7:46 PM @Anass, current conversation declared about new seats (over 10 existsing). So I'm talking about exactly what was declared and nothing more.
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:46 PM +1 Euphemia
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:47 PM @Euphemia - gender-wise the board has been super balanced for a while
@Ivan we tried that 2 or 3 times already
Francesc Fort 7:47 PM Redistributive criterias to be applied after the elections are done
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:47 PM @Ivan it never worked :(
Euphemia Uwandu 7:47 PM @Dariusz...across all regions?
Paulo Perneta 7:48 PM @- the whole system (old seats + new seats) is under discussion
Euphemia Uwandu 7:48 PM @Dariusz...across all language wikipedias and vulnerable groups?
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:49 PM @Euphemia - quite. What I'm saying is that we lack geographical diversity more
@Euphemia - with 10 seats and just 5 from the community, it is quite difficult to go across all language wikipedias.
- 7:49 PM @Paulo, not sure that's correct definition of current session. But I already wrote my opinion on both contexts.
Paulo Perneta 7:50 PM @- it is, Dariusz clarified it 2 times
Bishakha Datta 7:50 PM That's a good point, Ivan.
Jan-Bart de Vreede 7:51 PM people have taken English courses once they were selected paid by the foundation... but I agree with Ivan... it is another bias
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:52 PM That is amazing w Wikimedia Sudan!
Denis Barthel 7:52 PM Hi Fae -as I do not get exactly, how your behaviour helps, you might explain it? Thank you.
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:52 PM definitely a strong bias - moreover, native English speakers are naturally likely to be in a sort of a bubble, too
Richard Knipel 7:52 PM I would be glad if WMF considered giving univesity scholarships to board members who could use them even
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:53 PM @Richard - yeah, and not just board members, leaders in the movement in general
Euphemia Uwandu 7:53 PM +1Richard
sandra hanbo 7:53 PM +1 Good point @nanour
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:53 PM @Richard I have this idea of Wikimedia leadership unversity, we should really do it
and give certifications
Adel Nehaoua 7:53 PM Merci Nanor pour l'explication surtout le représentation des femmes au niveau de la communauté arabe
Richard Knipel 7:54 PM Dariusz, well I support it, universities are in total transition now anyway it's Wikiversity's big chance!
Nanour Garabedian 7:55 PM je vous en prie
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:55 PM @Richard LOL. I obviously think of something more like an intra-organizational training program, not uni per se, but we can and should do it
additional advantage is that people who take the program will be both qualified and dedicated
- 7:56 PM @Paulo, even if you right about current session's definition, my POV is until there any BoT seats appointment difference exists there have to be independent from "power" or "number" of any of WMF affiliates or communities itself. That's why there have to be both affiliate-dependent, local-communities dependent and necessarily some number of independent from [contributors] "number" or [affiliates] "power" appointed seats.
Dariusz Jemielniak 7:56 PM @Bishakha - IMHO a huge risk is to define diversity only in the community seats context
@Bishakha - the appointed seats should aim to be at least as diverse, possibly using the similar frameworks
Paulo Perneta 7:57 PM @- yes, I agree it has to take these affiliate seats into account, in case they remain
Nanour Garabedian 7:57 PM These Cff s were a great opportunity to know to much about the foundation in short time.Thank you facilitators!!
Željko Blaće 7:57 PM +100
- 7:58 PM Paulo, glad we had common POV now )
Bishakha Datta 7:58 PM Totally agree Dariusz and thank you for saying that. :)
Željko Blaće 7:58 PM all seats should bring some diversity in their portofolio
Chico Venancio 7:58 PM maybe we should increase the number of community seats and reduce appointed seats once all these initiatives have been deployed.
Željko Blaće 7:58 PM (no tokenized diversity)
Rachel Wexelbaum 7:58 PM +1 Z +1 Chico
Mohammed Bachounda 7:58 PM Thanks Nanour :)
Paulo Perneta 7:59 PM +1 Chico +1Z, please no tokenization
Chico Venancio 8:00 PM Appointed seats are useful, but being 50% of the board, is probably excessive now, and it seems this will be clearer after this reform.
sandra hanbo 8:00 PM Thank you for the meetings..It gets me know more about organization :)
Dariusz Jemielniak 8:01 PM @Euphemia - good point. Skills and experience (including life experience) are separate, and both needed.
Mykola Kozlenko 8:01 PM some skills are not earned at any university...
- 8:01 PM Chico, but does [we] predict a future? If talking about current situation - affiliate and board-appointed seats are still here. we have not forget it and basing on that fact exactly.
Dariusz Jemielniak 8:01 PM skills - experience - expertise
Ravan Al-Taie 8:01 PM Thanks for your time and commitment to attend
Rachel Wexelbaum 8:02 PM Thanks to all the facilitators for your work and patience
Mervat Salam 8:02 PM Thank you all, that was a rich discussion.
Bishakha Datta 8:02 PM Thanks for inviting me and for a really rich discussion. Have to go cook dinner now! Bye, all. :)
- 8:02 PM @Rachel, ..while whole 3 months )
Ravan Al-Taie 8:02 PM Serdar you are on mute
Muhammed Serdar 8:02 PM sorry i have problem with my mic 1 min
Dariusz Jemielniak 8:03 PM enjoy your dinner, Bishakha :)
Ravan Al-Taie 8:03 PM ok ask here in the chat
anass sedrati 8:03 PM Thank you Bishakha!
Ivan Martínez 8:03 PM Enjoy Bishakha!
Bishakha Datta 8:03 PM Bye!
Christoph J 8:03 PM Thank you all for this wonderful discussion :)
Euphemia Uwandu 8:04 PM Thank you for this rich and interesting conversation. Glad to attend and be part of it. Bye Everyone
Muhammed Serdar 8:05 PM just 1 min
Jan-Bart de Vreede 8:09 PM thank you all for your perspective, glad to have learned something today! hope to see some of you as candidates when te time comes, and if you think I can help , feel free to contact me: firstname.lastname@example.org
and thanks to the facilitators for organising these four sessions :)
Denis Barthel 8:10 PM Thank you Jan-Bart for being a part of this through all the sessions :)
Dariusz Jemielniak 8:10 PM +1
Ivan Martínez 8:10 PM Thanks for the facilitation and thanks everyone for their time specially that is happen on Sunday :)
Nanour Garabedian 8:10 PM Thank you Jan Bart
Francesc Fort 8:10 PM bye
Denis Barthel 8:10 PM Thank you Ivan
Ybsen Lucero 8:10 PM Thanks!
Željko Blaće 8:10 PM thank you
Ybsen Lucero 8:10 PM Bye!
Mohammed Bachounda 8:10 PM Thanks to all
This is an automatic transcript. The team has edited it only slightly and many mistakes still remain. We welcome corrections.
Generated during recording from Topic panel - Regional diversity (2021-03-14 at 06_01 GMT-7).mp4
[00:05:50] Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you for all the panelists for their time. So we would start with the basic question, let's say, about the session. So how could a regional quota be defined? This is the question for all our panelists. How would it affect the community? Voting process is expected this year. So if any of the panelists would like to express their opinion.
[00:06:27] If you want to, I would like to start just quickly. Yes, I just want to give a little bit of context and background to the idea and then we can expand the discussion, hopefully, so that the background of the idea was that in the beginning there was a list of wishes or of ideas that were suggested by the board of trustees. And when I saw these ideas, I was thinking that maybe we should stress more the regional diversity, because at least in my opinion, as someone coming from Africa, I was seeing a big problem in a lack of representativity of specifically African continent, but probably of other areas. I cannot represent all the areas and they don't know the context of all. They're always talking about my specific context. So this was the background of the idea. However, I agree with you on the point that you set, and that is actually very important, which is if it happens that there is an African woman active in Wicky data speaking French, it doesn't mean that she will represent exactly these communities in the board of trustees. She will represent the full community. But still, there is something specific about this profile that will maybe bring another world view and other NGOs and other perspectives than other people coming from other regions or coming from specific region or culture or having a specific background will make you see things from another another area or from another angle.
[00:07:54] And this will bring more richness and diversity to to the board and of course, which will or hopefully should provide better results. So to expand a little bit on the discussion and then talk to my fellow panelists, I think that there is for the moment, no specific solution. There are a lot of solutions. And if we see the discussions in Mehta and in others, of course, some people who are saying that maybe this has to be outsourced to the region so each region will choose someone internally and then the person will be directly on the board. Other people who are saying that maybe we should have people that are nominated to be elected and then the whole community will vote for them. There was also discussion about having people that are on the basis of, for example, this year would be Africa, next year would be Asia, etc. I specifically don't don't have any preference, but I think it's important to have regional diversity and to ensure that that it is present somehow because it will bring different perspectives. This was my background.
[00:09:08] Can I go next to oven? Yes, of course, yes.
[00:09:13] Ok, just following up with what I said, I think I'm very much in favor of finding some way to have regional diversity.
[00:09:22] And I really want to compliment everyone for coming to this point where this idea is being taken seriously, because one of the things we've seen, as everybody knows, is in the elections, we don't end up with regional diversity.
[00:09:37] So I think one of the things is, since there's talk about actually expanding the number of people on the board trade, it seems to me that having one seat like you from the elections, which is dedicated to regional diversity and thinking what I wanted and actually, according to me, I feel like everybody should be allowed to vote. Right, because I don't feel like people who are supposed Iowa to run for their regional diversity seat. Right. I think all of the other criteria, et cetera, should apply to it.
[00:10:28] And it shouldn't become like an exception in the community election process, where it's only people from a particular region that are able to vote for it.
[00:10:40] It should have the same stature as every other seat in a community election process. And I feel like, you know, one of the things when I was talking to Christina actually is I think we tend to see knowledge about geography as different from knowledge about, say, LOL or, you know, a functional area. Right. But I think it needs to be put on par and seen as a specialization. Great. Yeah, I think. Dalou, just one minute.
[00:11:22] So he can ask you the question there is if you can go and ask him, I did what I did start to flow.
[00:11:30] I just it wasn't really clear to me whether you're postulating that out of those six, one seat should be allocated to sort of like diversity seat balancing the other, for example, over the imbalance in the other five to six seats would provide some balance. Is this what you're suggesting?
[00:11:52] Yeah, I think the yeah, that is. And I think if you ask me honestly, like that should be held like not just done once.
[00:12:03] But sort of really held as some sort of specialization that's needed, but that's not going to come through other means necessarily and therefore so then it can be repeated or whatever, like whatever the criteria is, etc. And I feel like if everybody is voting, then I don't see why it really should have a very dramatic impact on the community election process. Right? Yeah.
[00:12:34] Thank you, Bushwhacker, so Daria's, yeah, so lots of excellent points made already. I want to emphasize that to me personally. I think geographical diversity should be treated pretty much like skills. And I think we need people with skills, experience, understanding the context, understand the community. It's vitally important also for external board members. We are getting a CEO of a big American company and they provide a lot of useful skills, but they miss out on a lot of useful experience, understanding the values, understanding the community. So I think I've treated the same way. Somebody who comes from a region that is not represented brings valuable understanding of the cultural context, knows how things are done. And in this sense, we definitely like it. I think the problem is for the whole board to do not just the community seats. I think a huge problem is if we said, yeah, we need to have diversity within the community and then we can have a majority of people from the United States in the appointed seats, that's that's the diversity. I think diversity should be treated as a whole. And from this point of view, I'm very sceptical about one idea that nobody actually said. But if we did pick up six seats, we have six continents. Let's give one to each continent. I don't think it makes any sense whatsoever. Honestly, I don't think we need more Americans for the board. Honestly, I wouldn't I wouldn't feel like we need to reserve a seat for an American or a Westerner, for that matter, Western European. We need to reserve a seat for a Western Europe. I don't think so. I don't think it is the purpose because we already have a lot of people who bring this experience anyway.
[00:14:16] So what Bishara says is resonating with me. I'm not sure if it should be one seat, if how this can be arranged, but I think this is important that there is some way to provide balance. And if it is so, we need to understand who is appointed on the board. Who is elected to other means and then then only then we can balance, I see practical issues there, it will be a very difficult process, very dynamic. We also know people, people join the board on different time stamps and different times. And so it will be balancing geographical diversity might be an issue. But on the other hand, we also know there is like historically over the last 15 years, we have massive overrepresentation of modern America, massive overrepresentation of Western Europe. I think currently it's only as runout and me if I can come Northwestern. I was running as a non Westerner when I was when I was running, but I spent a lot of time in the West anyway, so I'm going to help out. There is a huge overrepresentation of people with this experience, but if people have experience of totalitarian regimes, censorship, different cultures, different perception of diversity itself, when I talk to Americans about diversity, they have a very specific perception of diversity and it's very difficult to tell them that, yeah, it's super important, but it's not exactly how it's perceived everywhere else. So I'm all for what what what what you've been saying. I think it's important. I see a problem with practicalities, how this particular wants it or whatever. We decide how this can be achieved, that it will be providing actual balance.
[00:15:52] Thank you, dear sir, none of you raise your hand.
[00:15:57] Yes, I will start with defining the region that we are talking about this seat. And I agree with the s global desire to define this region for three seats. Actually, when we take this from the Arctic or South Global on Wikipedia, English, so we can see that from east to west to the south of Russia, except Australia and New Zealand, south of Europe, except Israel and south over all you can say, from the border to American, Mexican and to the south to to the last point in American Latin.
[00:16:48] And actually so we have three three major defining regions and we can tie it with three regional states.
[00:17:03] And I don't refer to, say, Qatar here because Qatar, it's a kind of privilege or alignment to yeah, if we don't have a qualification. But we have this, you know, because they're the most important underlying concerns actually is if we are elected from the regions, they will have the qualification or now they will be eligible or no these candidates or other potential candidate.
[00:17:36] So to not be for the favor of the regional seats, I, I thought as myself, if I want to be a candidate to the board of trustees, so how can I know if I am eligible or no. So.
[00:17:56] I talked about that yesterday during the support of a candidate we can do like a global or a large scale assessment and they can everyone evaluate themselves if they are eligible or no to go as a candidate or potential candidate. And then the person that they have not in this region, three regions south global with which I define it so they can try to test themselves if they are qualified or know. Thank you.
[00:18:43] Can I take the yes, yes. Yes, thank you.
[00:18:49] The first thing I have to say is that it is really recognizable that different voices throughout the movement have clear that is not possible to follow the path that we have taken these years in the main body of governance of the movement. That's very bold. I think there's a claim in different aspects of our society that it's inevitable to don't have a equality bodies and we need to show the diversity. And it's true that the solutions are always complicated. But in some websites of the same size as Wikimedia and international organizations such as the United Nations governance bodies of the international civil society organizations, different governments, there's a discussion at least that the last 10 years that and a consensus that they hold us or I might really reach out to them on something that is necessary to ensure that diversity in the body of governance that like the status of Wikimedia.
[00:20:05] But I think the main problem here is trying to find a solution in a single moment. I think that is a problem because we have a complex situation in the movement, other models of internal governance, in fact, a couple of years and years of discussions, and they have not found a holistic model to strike a problematic in one shot. You know, I think we can make my position clear is that at this moment, we are more or less clear that there are models of cooperation in the movement that does not fit in existing categories in the world, such as geographical or linguistic criteria. It is clear that there are voluntary or organic initiatives that have existed in the movement for years that should have a seat on the world due to the amount of knowledge that they have accumulated over the years and that simply are not reaching the board due to a rigorous, rigorous criteria criteria as we have today. So I think at this time we do not aspire to solve all the problems in a single chance. Perhaps we can take small steps in the search of one. And this is a name that is to make this movement more inclusive, I think. Thank you.
[00:21:32] Thank you, Yvonne.
[00:21:35] Robyn, may I add something? Yes, yes, of course, yes.
[00:21:39] Ok, so I guess the question that I wanted to ask is, you know, since there are seats that are up through elections and there are seats that are through appointments. If there is a strong understanding that geographical specializations are lacking, would it not make sense for Boult sort of tweets?
[00:22:05] To commit at least one seat to this, what I guess my question is, why should it only be the election process straight?
[00:22:18] Because if we genuinely think of geographical specialization as a skilled. Rather than a sort of diversity thing, only looks like a skill that you have knowledge about X right then is this something that the board can consider, which is that from the appointed seats?
[00:22:42] So. You don't keep one that allows for expertise on underrepresented geographic geographies in the governance. Yeah.
[00:22:56] So unless you go first, then Dario's place, yes, first of all, I will not answer this question, but I think it's a very, very valid point and I agree with you about it. So hopefully someone will will answer. I mean, when there was discussion ongoing, I was taking some points. And actually I have not done something related to because we are talking about the community seats. So I took notes here about for me at least, and I don't know if you will agree or disagree with me that people who are going to be representing this regional diversity, they are representing the full community and they tried to write some arguments why, at least in my opinion, they should be chosen by the full community and not only by the people they represent or they claim to represent. For me, first of all, it's because they represent the whole community. This is obvious. So this is the first argument. We are community representative. They are not going to be regional representative. Second, think it's something that Richard mentioned in The Shot, which is practicality. You know, many people are going to be anonymous. So if you are a voter coming from Asia, then you have to disclose where you sit. If you want to be engaged in this vote for the Asian representative. And I don't think it's fair, we have to allow people to be anonymous so everyone in the community should be able to vote no matter where they sit, and they should not disclose it.
[00:24:25] So this is another argument. And the third argument that is very crucial, according to me, is transparency. And when I say transparency, I want to go back to the origin of this full discussion about the board and why they want to have a call for feedback. One of them was that they don't want to have a popularity contest. So if we are going to have regional elections that are going to happen internally, I, I am afraid that there will be also sort of a popularity contest because I know my contest, the context, and I know that sometimes this is easier to happen internally or locally than globally. So if we have something global, I think that it will allow more transparency and it will be better in order to to to have really the people that deserve to represent that regional community to be there. And finally, this is more of a question, but I think most of us agree that it's important to allocate one seats either appointed or our community or even more than one seat for this regional or geographical knowledge. But for me, I think we should still dig a bit more and consider if we have to define, first of all, what are these regions and what sort of specific knowledge do you need? Is it political knowledge? Is economical knowledge? Is it knowledge of the community and knowing who is editing? I don't expect that we answer this now, but I just want to give some elements.
[00:25:58] Thank you so, Darrius.
[00:26:01] I totally agree with us to be shucker here, I think reserving one seat that is globally elected is definitely a way to go. Regional elections would naturally create a perception that these people are representing the local people. And for this reason alone, I don't think we should do it. And of course, these considerations about identity don't require being required to identify as coming from a region. Also also definitely makes a lot of sense. But we we do need people with experience, with being able to relate rather than people who will have this feeling. I am representing this particular region. I have to fight for the region because I think that's the mentality we need to achieve. I would add one thing here, because I think when we talking about the global south or the east or whatever, we define it, we fall for two fallacies. One is the geographical fallacy that we say, oh, not in America. And then we think Mexico falls there, too. And then we we think not not the West. And then we have conflicts in the West. So I think we need specific criteria. And the second fallacy would be that the criteria should not be just the GDP. The GDP is important. I think it's one of the criteria should use GDP per capita, maybe with be some refinement, because, you know, as you know, dispersion of income is super important. Some countries have a relatively OK GDP, but there is a huge disparity. But I also think we need to look specifically for two things, countries that are not super high in terms of freedom of speech, because I think freedom of speech is something people just don't get. If they are from the United States, they don't get it and they freedom of speech, given it's something they really need in the history books. And the second thing, basically, human rights, I think. Selecting basic human rights, freedom of speech, which is probably a subset of it, but not always, and and the economic factors would be probably advisable. So we should reserve this seat for countries that fall outside of the top of the rankings in these areas, maybe.
[00:28:15] Ok, thank you, Daria. So before going to Nannar, it's worth mentioning that the first half hour, half an hour of the meeting just finished.
[00:28:25] So we have another 15 minutes that will be followed by open mic session. It will be run by my colleague Krisna, who is a facilitator of South Asia. So we ask all panelists, please, to keep it short for the next 50 minutes. So we stick with the time. So please.
[00:28:51] Everyone talking and this topic is because there is a lack of diversity, and I'm quoting here from the response of various in twenty seventy elections, he said diversity problem on the board is much more accurate in terms of geographical and cultural focus. So what we did through between these four years and we are here now so acute, I don't know the meaning in English, but I know it in Swedish, which means emergency. So if it is emergency to do this diversity of culture and geographical mix in the board. So we are here to decided that, yes, these regional seats, it's very important to have this diversity on the board.
[00:29:47] But a.
[00:29:50] The big concerns, as I said, will come some somebody or a candidate with illegible or don't have the sufficient criteria so we can elect them, we we can sicking them, worried that the assessment assessment and to know exactly what we have in these regions and we we need them and they will need us there think that how can we do the the the elections process? Actually, in my mind when I get this invitation and I'm to you in the in the foundation and movement. So I thought I put a model in my mind that if if we are going to take the three regional seats with this s global. So first we start with the communities elections between them and then come by the support to oppose a neutral system or to and the second one to do the election between the communities of the region. After defying that with the system of arranged the system a b, a b is that a Philly affiliate selection? And therefore we can do the final one between the three regions to go for the three seats with the the system of a secure place.
[00:31:38] I put this model for me and to evaluate the the better or the eligible candidate from this region to reach for the diversity and race to the board in the same time. And one more thing that I didn't understand before. What is different is how can be not representative if I'm coming from the community. And that is you repeated the more time. This is not a union in the other office hours. And I understood that when the invitation came and say my name and beside it, Syria and beside it, Wikimedia Levante.
[00:32:28] I'm not representing Syria here and Wikimedia either, but I'm still here and talking and discussing the topic. So this is not representing your community, but still in the place to discuss it and get a solution for get us like diversity in the board.
[00:32:50] Thank you.
[00:32:54] Thank you. And who else wants to?
[00:33:02] Comment. Of the panelists. OK, please.
[00:33:11] Yes, thank you. I would like just to discuss about something that we've been discussing in the chat, which is related to how can we define if someone will be able to be representative of of a region? And my specific question was, if it has to be someone living in the region currently or if it is someone who was born in the region and then immigrated for a reason to study or to work, or is it may be someone that is not from the region, but gained expertise through doing a PhD about that region or who learn the language. Again, I don't expect to to have any answer. No, but I think these are also very important points that that we need to to define, because when we answer these questions, we will go back to the rationale, which is why do we need this person? Is it because we the person for knowledge? If it's the knowledge, then maybe whoever can have the knowledge. It's just that they need to have the knowledge. Is it because they live there and we need them to get to the local authorities? Then maybe we need someone living there. So we need to understand why we need the regional diversity so that we can identify who can help in that.
[00:34:27] Thank you. Yes, please, Derrius.
[00:34:32] Yeah, I think what Onasis makes a lot of sense, and to me, it's a lot like all other kinds of privilege. If I'm a white male, I'm super privileged. You know, it's so wonderful. I recommend becoming a white male to everybody.
[00:34:49] But understanding how privilege works very often requires you to talk to people who are not privileged or be one. If you're asking me if somebody who migrated is more suitable to join the board, I would say I'm not sure because I know. Somebody who lives in a totalitarian regime experiences this on a daily basis, and of course, if you're an oppositionist and you migrated because you were escaping the country, then you have this experience by by by default. But I would say that it's about the personal experience that people should be sharing, let alone by geographical, but the passport, a passport.
[00:35:30] I remember somebody running from the border.
[00:35:34] From Global South Region. And this person was super privileged. It was a person, very high status, super rich, flying first class. We don't we do know from Facebook. I'm not sure if this person was actually bringing this particular experience that we are looking for here, even though great person, great. Great person to talk to that, pretty knowledgeable about all things, but it's not exactly, I think, the kind of bringing the understanding of the predicament of.
[00:36:08] Low GDP, totalitarian regime, lack of freedom of speech to the table.
[00:36:13] So is somebody who migrated qualified? Maybe, but not just by the by the sole fact of moving somewhere is by why they moved by the personal history, I think. And from this point of view, I think it is important to ask people, why do you even think why do you think do what kind of diversity bring to the table? How many people will die by having to answer this question? They will realize maybe I should even run because I'm actually I'm super privileged. I don't bring stuff to the table.
[00:36:43] And some people would realize, yeah, I'm from this region. I do understand it. I can describe how. So from my point of view, it's about. Understanding what people bring to the table. Making a focus, a frame that is requesting us to look at the lack of diversity of the board serves the purpose of bringing people with more diverse experiences to the table. And reserving a seat, Lawrence, the fact that this specific skill set experience knowledge will be brought to the table. That's how I think about. I'm not sure if I'm making a coherent sense here, but I'm trying to share with you why. I think it's it's not just about the passport. And it's not just about the fact that you stayed or left your country. It's about why you stayed or why you left. It's basically what makes you bring this understanding of oppression, lack of lack of freedom of speech and all other things. Does it does it make sense?
[00:37:48] Thank you, Daria.
[00:37:49] So we will go back to you. But before that, we have only five minutes. So please keep it short to be shucker.
[00:37:57] And if you need anything and if you have anything to add, please.
[00:38:05] Ok, so, yeah.
[00:38:09] First, Yvonne Novacek. OK, go ahead.
[00:38:14] Ok, yeah, I think we can go forward trying to do to to talk about hypothetical situations of the person that can have the intention to go for the OR, of course, and we can and go forward with many examples of what about for Japanese living in Africa and all that examples. And I think it's very valuable. But actually at this point, we have some visible initiatives that articulate some groups of comedians, some groups of people in very recognizable way in some regions and areas and geographical criteria that I think it's not perfect but can function like a basis for an emergency situation like A.S.A.. Why rules, Lexie, like we can do with Eurabia at this point and with the time that we have previous to the election? We have some groups I know that is not perfect. I know not all the people that represent represented actually in that models, but that models exist. So maybe we can work in an emergent way trying to find some some interesting profiles from these initiatives because we will gain more in attracting people from the existing supporters of the movement. And I want to mention again, I know that is not perfect. I know that many of that initiative doesn't have the representation of all the countries, of all the people, of all the people in the movement. But I think it's a very good point of starting trying to having in mind that this is an emergent situation. This is not perfect, but maybe we can have something of diversity in this in these models. Thank you.
[00:40:09] Thank you, Yvonne.
[00:40:11] Yeah, you know, I guess the thing that I'm struggling with this, if it's decided that there's one region like one set for now, just for discussion sake, we call it loosely, it's a global south seat. Right.
[00:40:26] And the whole community participates in choosing somebody from who runs from that seat.
[00:40:34] Why do we need additional criteria? Right, because the just like anybody else in any other seat who runs for elections, as long as they fulfill sort of basic Wikimedia eligibility criteria, I think the only difference should really be that this seat or seats should be reserved for people from certain parts of the world to contest. But I would be a little wary of imposing additional eligibility criteria. Right, because it then becomes too heavy a burden. Right. On the. And I think it should be equal in all other aspects to the rest of the elections except for this one small sort of.
[00:41:25] Ok, thank you, Michelle. We apologize, Anderson. I know that already will be four to five minutes for the open, like you will have the chance to respond to people's questions and express your opinion. So I will be handing over to my colleague Krishna, who will moderate the open mic session.
[00:41:47] Yeah, thanks a lot. And thanks to all the panelists have said wonderful thoughts. So let's start the open mic before we start.
[00:41:56] You can so you can ask a question. You can raise your hand using the Google meat option. And also you can also put this message on the chart so that way and you can also ask questions and the different languages, German and French will help to translate. And also in the middle of something, I can support Arabic. So if you feel that is more comfortable, please ask and we'll try to translate. So, yeah, we can take the first question.
[00:42:35] I see no. Sandra.
[00:42:41] Hello, I would like to ask about like it was in the chapter about how how we could what is the criteria for getting additional is it depends on the continent or depending on language or depending on what exactly what is. I mean, cultural to say that we are going to enhance regional seats and having it because now the criteria is not pretty clear. And you are saying that you want somebody from like if we are going to Continental is Russia and the Middle East, some of the Middle East in Asia and it is Japan and other very different regions and they have very different communities. And the main question is about what is the main criteria when you are going to say we are going regional seats, what what we should get in our minds.
[00:43:44] Any of the panelists can respond to the.
[00:43:51] No, yes, no.
[00:43:54] Yes, I as I saw it and defined the regions, the Middle East could be with the desert, I mean the Asian side. And so it's clear and we can be agree about that. The problem here is to have this diversity foot, which came from the regions. And after that, after decided and assigned the seats, we can decide which which part and the communities where they can go.
[00:44:32] And for the criteria, there is a pollution form for meter who will be a candidate can go there and about and do like a self evaluation to know if it's me at this point or no.
[00:44:56] But I will add to that this evaluation form is very generous and we need more specific to know if I exactly like a candidate as a candidate, I meet the qualification and this. Efficiency for being a trustee or no. So we need to more detailed questions in this evaluation form to and this details can give a kind of confidence to the contributors to think.
[00:45:40] If I am eligible to vote for this seat or no thank you and I just want to your Sandra.
[00:45:50] Yeah, that's right. Sorry. So you're saying that it is very general and we need specific criteria when you are going to say if you want to go there and evaluate yourself to find where are you exactly?
[00:46:04] And if you're opposition to this, what is the the specific criteria are looking on like? I think the issue is not trying to clear four criteria for No.
[00:46:24] This over my middle school, so I would give them to like the conditions or the books short because we will have more participants to ask questions and we can share your thoughts on both of you.
[00:46:39] Hi. I'm sorry.
[00:46:42] Hello. Yeah, I, I just I wanted to second the idea of the the getting clear categories. I think there's been a lot of like vague terms like oh should it be should be global. You should use the term global south should be based on particular regions, should be based on GDP, should it be based on the free speech levels as perceived or democracy levels. There's a lot of very complicated things. I think historically the the elected seats and the affiliates and the and the community board elections have relatively well represented, but not very well, relatively well. See, and I broke up. It seems like the regions that are that are most underrepresented at that level have been Africa and Asia. And so those might be useful. Those might be useful regions to use. Another alternative would be to just have an election in one year. So maybe an election for community seats like the global community seats election and the election and like have a list of regions. And if there's no one from South Asia, Southeast Asia, Latin America in the other stuff, then people in that can run in the underrepresented regions election the next year.
[00:47:49] That might be a practical way to do it and it might be helpful. Also separatism at a of time. So there's not as much confusion among them and also that people can run into in the global election. Everyone can run. Everyone for everyone can run. And if they say if there's someone from Southeast Asia who wins in the first election, then we take Southeast Asia off the list of underrepresented regions for the second election because they're not underrepresented anymore. Not in this capacity. OK, you.
[00:48:13] Thank you, A. Next.
[00:48:18] Yes, thank you, Christina. I just wanted to say something that I think is important in my opinion, and that was also apparent when we were discussing the strategy, especially when we were discussing diversity. So I am a little bit afraid that most of us sitting in this hall and most of people who are editing Wikipedia projects are privileged, especially if you are coming from the global south, because first you have to afford to have Internet, you afford to have a computer or device. And I would say that you are definitely not the average of the economy or or whatever standards of life that are in these countries. So the point that I want to make here is that unfortunately, because the world is not perfect, unfortunately, most of active Wikimedia, if we call the global south, are kind of privileged. And it's it's not bad because at least these people are trying to volunteer their time and give information about their context. But I don't think we should try to idealize the situation and try really to look for the one who is poor and does not have access to anything now to empower them to put them in the board. Of course, this would be ideal scenario and it would be good to do it. But with what we have now and with an election coming soon, probably, how can we still make sure that there will be representation of this region, given that probably it will be someone who will be more or less privileged and more having more resources than than the others?
[00:49:55] Thanks, Michaela.
[00:49:59] Yes, hello.
[00:50:01] So I would probably slightly develop the idea I had in the chat and probably just like I think that, first of all, I don't think we should have a fixed seat, like we are saying today, that she's well represented, but Asia is not. I mean, this is this is a situation which can change in a matter of years, because six years ago we have not we have not had a single board member from the sea. And like before Darwesh was elected and before until you have ever elected, was not very well represented at the global level. It just happened by perhaps coincidence. Perhaps luck said it well represented at the moment. But it can change in a few years that we would not have a good sea representation, but we would have full representation of Asia or Africa or whatever. So I think like this should be sort of a flexible process where probably a few months ahead of the election, the board and the community somehow defines what are secure and what are the current gaps in the geography we need to present. So pretty much the same discussion as we had with skills two days ago. Like the board can say that we like people with technology expertise and the board can say and the community and the board can agree that we like people with that say technology and expertise, and we would target recruit people with this particular expertise. And two years later, we can say that we know like some other kind of expertise.
[00:51:38] We don't like any more African expertise on the board, but we need, let's say, Latin American or whatever, or we need expertise from minority languages. And from a practical point of view, I think that the best way to allocate this regional seat would be sort of by a procedure similar to the current affiliate one. Like currently, we have affiliates to affiliate states which are open to all affiliates and where you need an affiliate endorsement, THRAWN, we can probably add a certain seat which would be allocated to some region predefined before the election. And let's say if it's an African seat, we require endorsement from African affiliates and that would be that filter from representing the region. If African affiliates say that this person is a good representative of African affiliates interests or African affiliates experience or whatever definition of experience skills which you that would be a filter. And we would we should not impose a more complex filter. Like, is this person an immigrant? Is this has this person lived long enough in this region? Has this person deep enough expertise and so on? So. I think that that's a way to make sure that we have selected a good person for this region and it doesn't prevent people, this person, for need for regular seats. This person does not prevent them to run for community seats and whatever.
[00:53:10] This just gives one allocated seats to a given the regional skill set.
[00:53:16] And with some filter for representativity, I'm not sure this is the perfect system, but this is what we can already build from what we currently have in our community.
[00:53:29] Thank you, Stephen.
[00:53:38] Stephen, you either thank you, I appreciate this call. I just want to let you know, I mean, I'm a newcomer to this, so I don't have a lot of familiarity, but I've been following this very eagerly. I just want to know two things. First of all, I started a page on Wikipedia called Wikipedia. Coquelin Wikipedia proposals right now is just very, very. The website, but I figured that because the community want to feel like it was presented to them, I think you guys are doing great, having a full discussion, concerned how we're actually going to bring the proposal to.
[00:54:21] As a Christian, I know you guys are.
[00:54:26] For me, I think it's a benefit, but my concern is when you bring your proposal to Wikipedia, everyone has a vote and they'll feel like you presented them. I don't have a strong opinion about the panel that you're creating, but I think it's a positive idea. I'm open to it. So I'm just curious.
[00:54:54] Stephen, William, multipolarity must be a. Oh, and also when it's presented, would it be presented as a fully already concluded idea that people either accept or don't accept or will then be open for further discussion once it's presented? So those are my main questions. Thanks.
[00:55:15] Thank you.
[00:55:19] No, I would like to point out here to a rational and about the comedians that have aware of the system and technical issues, and I can give an example from my community in the Wikimedia Arabic or my user Wikipedia, Arabic, let's say that we have a brilliant name that they are they running a fantastic system in our version of Wikipedia. And they have and they are some of them admins in other project also on a global level. So there is no problem for for me, as I know in my community, with someone that don't have or don't know about the technical issues or how we are running the system or that. But problem is. But have they don't have enough confidence to know that they are eligible to be a trustees, perhaps they need the other the lack of connection with the Western world, for example. So we are here for every eight and say that what is the point? The criteria exactly? Let me do let let us do a kind of form. Very amazing way to say, OK, do you want to know if you are eligible to be trustees or no. So please respond to this question. Yes or no. Why is expertise put this fall? And then if you you but you're by yourself, receive the answer and you know, then if you are eligible or no. And then you can say, OK, for your community, if there is a possibility for this regional seats, I'm ready because they I have a this approved approach from this form or assessment that I can run this election.
[00:57:35] So there is a lot of a specialist in in a lot of communities. But just waiting for the chance and more support then.
[00:57:50] Thank you, Michelle.
[00:57:53] Yeah, I just wanted to say actually that, you know, I think there needs to be an election equity between the candidates, right.
[00:58:06] It's a little I still find it a little concerning that too many additional requirements are being imposed only on somebody, a candidate who will run from, let's say, diversity skills or a geographical specialization. Same trait. The idea is to create a path to.
[00:58:29] For example, again, I just want to give an example, in India, we have seats that are kept aside for women to participate in the elections right in the local village level elections, because this was seen to be a huge gap.
[00:58:49] But apart from the fact that you are a woman.
[00:58:54] There is no additional criteria that you and you alone need to fulfill. To qualify for that seat. So what I'm trying to say is that, you know, if there are going to like, why should just this seat take the burden off, like.
[00:59:13] Many other things, I think the idea is to basically open up representation.
[00:59:20] Two people from Geography's where they've played a minimal role in government, so I just want justice to be a little careful in sort of just putting too much on the seat, though that's something that continues to trouble me.
[00:59:35] I think the other question that I really want to ask is, how big is the border going to be? And therefore, to me, what is important is if it's going to be like I think one of the discussions is about the possibility of expanding to 16 seats.
[00:59:53] If it's going to be 16 seats, then. Is one geographical specialization seat or whatever we call it. Is that enough for what is the kind of range of numbers that we are looking at? It know to me it's different whether the board has 10 people or whether the board has 16 people ET. And I also wanted to find out, are there other kinds of specializations or skills that have been identified as lacking for which, again, provisions would be made?
[01:00:34] Thanks. I see that there are no hands raised, but particularly welcoming people from Asia, Africa, Latin America, if I see many people out here, if they have anything to ask, also, you can also respond to what pundits are saying.
[01:01:09] He is the.
[01:01:22] On. Yes, Douglas.
[01:01:26] I just saw somebody speaking up, I just wanted to address this democracy thing that was discussed in the chat, I think.
[01:01:35] Having some preference to people with experience from countries that are not in top 20 democracies.
[01:01:44] Is could be useful. I think that understanding how the systems operations work brings something to the table and somebody else, if it should be Wikimedia, should we promote democracy?
[01:01:57] I don't see it this way. I think that people who come from non-democratic countries and nevertheless are passionate about Wikimedia are often the ones who can teach us a lot about what we can do better, how we can protect people in the regions. We're using Wikipedia. Wikipedia is forbidden and I think people from the top 20 democracies are in a bubble. So from this point of view, I would say, yeah, even in an this documented Uruguay is in top 20 democracies, even though it's number fifty nine in terms of GDP per capita.
[01:02:32] And I would say maybe there should be some some formula or maybe Uruguay should not be counted. Maybe it's.
[01:02:40] Low in GDP, per capita, high in democracy, and as such, maybe we can live with with not qualifying it as a full fledged democracy. I don't know, but I think there should be some reference also for countries which are not fully democratic and also for to so it's defining the global south is key, just as I said. How we define the regions will be crucial if we just see Middle East, of course, Israel will count and for many counts, Israel will count us for democracy. High GDP per capita freedom of speech are OK with human rights. And from this point of view, it would be considered outside of the global south. So it's not about geography of.
[01:03:39] Yes, yes, no, yes, I will start with the last thing that is about it. They are in the main report. They said that they are not interested about this original or this expanding of if I if I understand, went on expanding about this board of trustees. So and the other point and there is in the feedback and the report, there's one that answers our opinion that say I want to be selected by their own merits without the help of a quota system. That means that that is there is a people with the criteria, there is a people with qualifications, but they don't want to be a just a privilege of a quota and that, OK, here you have this seat of regents. So we are not looking for your capacities or qualifications. So this and the. The other important thing that I want to talk about it and didn't discuss enough, I think the point that it's actually a point that I have a question has the has the foundation. Need not reach to the self sufficiency to to get the disappointed seeds from of the community or the foundation. We have a thousand and thousands of contributors in the world in nine hundred projects.
[01:05:34] So and this idea actually is Kim and I agree with it. When Ravana detailed meeting as as a facilitator with our with my community and one of my peers say that the appointed site should be more community communities as as well, explaining that worldwide there must be some expert in finance and a wiki member as well, or a legal master who happens to be a Wiki project participant in the same time. This will give the whole board more credibility and will change the way they look at things, the way they work and make decisions. And I agree totally with that because someone that have this spirit of wiki and be in the board is not the same that someone not dedicate time to volunteer or could be a volunteer, but not in the same or in the way that we do it in in the foundation and the wiki world. Thank you.
[01:06:48] Thanks, none of us.
[01:06:52] Yes, thank you. I just would like to link what we are discussing today, discussing today about regional seats with the two points, one point that has been recurrently coming to the shot, and that is a little bit confusing me, which is affiliates. So I don't really understand and maybe it's not decided yet, but I don't understand how this change in community seats would be happening in the future. Is it going to be that the affiliates seats are going to disappear and that everything is going to be voted and decided upon? What is discussed now, or is it that the two affiliate seats will be kept and we're talking just about six other seats? I'm a little bit confused, so I don't know. Maybe it's an ongoing discussion, so there is no answer. But I was just confused. And the second point that I would like to mention, even though it was discussed yesterday, which is the relationship with the hubs, especially regional hubs, because we're discussing regional diversity, some comments in the matter and in previous discussions were mentioning that this should be linked, in my opinion. And this is, again, just my opinion, I think it should absolutely not be linked because maybe regional hubs will have a professional duty or maybe they will work on other things. But I don't think that we should have something similar to vetting candidates or nominating candidates for reasons that I have already mentioned before, that these people should represent the full community and should be chosen by the full community, even though they should have the knowledge or skill related region. But I really fear and they say it again, I fear a lot of lobbies and a lot of lack of transparency and many internal things that maybe are not appearing externally, but that happen definitely inside communities. So I am really advocating the global choice, even though someone is going to represent or have knowledge about specific region.
[01:08:49] Ok, time tunnels are just one month before we are like we have 20 minutes left before the official session ends, so let us try to keep it short. The and yeah, we'll also be able to stay up to 20 minutes and until conversation formally. But the officials in such an important. That's for sure.
[01:09:14] I have a question, actually, after Nonoo spoke, this have got to be suppose I'm somebody who's safe from Jordan. And suppose I say I would like to be a candidate in this election, but I don't want to be in the, you know, the seat that's being kept aside because I feel like I have a reasonably good chance just in a general seat. What happens to the euro?
[01:09:42] So can can somebody from that region also choose to run in a general seat if they feel or is it compulsory then that everybody from those regions will now have to go only in those seats? I think. I mean, I've gone. So after Nonoo spoke, this sort of occurred to me and it sounds a little complicated. So I'm curious if people have any thoughts about this.
[01:10:19] Quick reply. I think it would be horrible if we created a system in which we say that people from the communities we want to have more diversity from are reserved for the same. If anything else, I would say maybe they should be running for the general seat and then from the people who were running and are from the regions and didn't win the elections, we should call for this particular seat, for example, for something like this, but definitely shouldn't be excluded from running. It wouldn't make any sense. And also they should be punished for not winning. So if you do not win the original election. The natural psychological predilection would be that you do not want to put yourself out again for another possible failure. So I think maybe it should be like you run and if you do not make it to the top, you still can qualify for this particular seat or something like this.
[01:11:11] Now, that's an interesting idea, actually, to.
[01:11:17] Yeah, Richard.
[01:11:19] Yeah, I would say I would suggest that that may be. I definitely do think that that the general election should be completely open, as it has been in the past in terms of anyone can enter. I think it might be useful to just do them in different times. So might be good to have like a one year is the general election. The next year is the underrepresented regions election and then the under-represent regional election. And we could just just qualify find we could find exactly which regions weren't represented and maybe just, you know, if the US or Western Europe was represented, they don't count. But but if South Asia or Latin America aren't represented, they do count for the underrepresented regions election. And they might be a convenient way to do it and to have it be flexible each year with each election.
[01:12:04] And you, Michael?
[01:12:08] Yes, I wanted just to comment on what I said, I would personally suggest having like a double ballot election.
[01:12:15] So, for instance, we have one ballot with all candidates and one separate ballot. There are like only Middle Eastern candidates from a Middle Eastern state. So, like, if you are from Jordan, you more or less running on those ballots and you can get elected on both. So, for example, if we say that we need Middle Eastern candidates, we can perfectly elect two of them, one on a specific Middle Eastern state and one on the general state or something like that, because I I mean, democratically, both would be bad. Democratical probably isn't the only viable way, because if we say that Middle Eastern candidates running in general election and let's say the best Middle East, our candidate is tense, then it would be very bad for this candidate to understand that, well, you're tough, but you're elected only because you're a Middle Eastern. But the candidate from like three to eight are not elected because they are not Middle Eastern. That would be horrible from Democratic point of view. So because you would understand like you are. The Cuadrilla you only won based on your Regenhard, not on your merit, but I think you should perfectly be able to run those like, for example, if you say we need Middle Eastern candidates and the top two seats worldwide are Middle Eastern. Both should be elected.
[01:13:38] So I think that's probably the most viable way to do it.
[01:13:45] And obviously, you can say like you are Middle Eastern, but you. You're not Middle Eastern, but you are, but you can run not on Middle Eastern cities. Well, obviously you can refuse running on that city if you don't want.
[01:14:02] Thank you all, none of it has happened, but like before, I pointed out to her, if anyone who hasn't spoken, if they would like to speak, let me give you a more Moines's. It's you're saying, you know what, if I'm wrong?
[01:14:22] Hi, everyone. Sorry, I just dined late and I'm just trying to get the meat of the whole conversation, but from what I've been following so far, I just learned that there are some important people we should try to include in this diversity talk, even though we know that diversity is a very complex term in this instance, because we are going to look at the geography, we're going to look at the language Wikipedias and we're going to look at smaller communities. But I also want us to include the diversity. We should talk about women when we are talking about this, because as we all know, we have the issue of gender gap generally in the movement. So maybe we should try to also include women from states in our region or maybe geography. And we should also think about if there are any vulnerable persons or groups in the movement that I think we should also be able to make sure we include such persons in these states is very important. Thank you.
[01:15:37] Thank you. Oh, yes.
[01:15:41] I think one of the points is that it depends absolutely about the calls that we can make because I watch the comment of Francis Keen, the chat about have general free elections, but with some restrictions or I I don't want to talk about restrictions, but maybe we can make a call that can ensure that diversity. So everyone is invited to to to be a candidate. But at this time, we want more about these profiles.
[01:16:19] One woman, more people from LGBT, plus more people, as Durieux mentioned it, with these kind of criteria from these countries that can fulfill these criteria. I think many depends about the goal, because I think that people from some 13 countries or some certain religions can feel more attractive if the call to participation can be more friendly or can consider more factors than the actual factors are considering. And I believe that's in the other hand, some people in the chat flow that there are some conditions that is need for some people, like a stipend or childcare or some some supports that people in the real world who have professional work in their own lives needs. So I believe in the other hand, the board must ensure at technical level that the participation of people who like me doesn't speak English as a language is ensured because they having a high level of English as a conversational conversational level. I know as far as I know, that was one of the characteristics that you need to run for the board because all the conversations are in English. So a high level of English is a good and a good example for for the inequities in the world, because at least in my context, people who have a decent level of English or a high level of conversational English is a people who have privileges, who have access to private education, who have free time to devote to to have conversational and skills, you know, so I think that is another major obstacle that is blocking great profiles for many people in the world to report just because they don't have a good English level.
[01:18:20] So I think, on the other hand, we need to ensure that the internal functioning of the board have translation at least, or something that can ensure the participation of people who doesn't have the English as a modern language. Thank you. Thank you. On another.
[01:18:41] I will start with the last point of English and I have here, I did my homework very well. I think I printed this a couple of candidates in the twenty seventeen. And the only point, if you if you have a basic level of English, we will provide you with the support and training as part of your importing. When we come a trusted onto board that is a school full of trust and about the criteria and qualification, again, because it's someone from Middle East. And to assume that and to go to not be a doubt about is the person or candidate eligible or not. So the assessment system, I think we provide kind of confidence to everyone. And don't forget that this candidate will be a peer in the board of trustees with the other people that come from the other type of election or selection. So they should have the same level, the basic level that should the board talk about it or decide it more than the evaluation for, I think and about what the FEMA Femia and sorry about the gender gap in the main report or the meetings that data raffone with the Arabic communities and the Wikimedia Soudan, the Wikimedia Sudan, where all the woman's and the she wrote in the in the report that there is a reverse gender gap. So what we want here exactly, we want want things. We want a dedicated contributor who can give a time and be qualified to contribution in one of projects of a foundation.
[01:21:00] What what can this come from? Because already this foundation is more than 15 years now.
[01:21:07] So we need more people.
[01:21:09] We need more perspective. We need where is that? The people that in the South, that they have no representation, but we don't want to represent them just because you are from this place on the earth. But we need them because you cannot understand the difficulty that someone have less than one Gigha to access Internet and still contributor in in Wikipedia or in a project, someone that they don't have electricity for more than 10 hours per day. And when they have it, go to Wikipedia and contribute Serch. So that's all what I can say about how much we need that and one point more, if it's not original to be original seats that I ask for in the first office, our there if there's a body between the trustees, board of trustees and the communities. And yesterday, Shuni talked about the S.E.C., that kind of committee will gather all together. And I hope this committee there, every community can have a representative in that one can see me.
[01:22:43] Thank you.
[01:22:45] Thank you all next. But I just want to remind that we have five minutes left to study.
[01:22:54] Yes, Christiane, thank you. I will be very brief. So according to what I understood from this discussion, there is common support to the idea that there should be a specific place or seat for people having knowledge about the region or about a specific context. But I want you to move a little bit forward and take the opportunity that we are all meeting together and discussing to see how the next steps will be. And I specifically noted three questions. So the first question is, how many seats are we talking about? I mean, some people are saying, well, some people are saying two. I don't expect that we decided during this meeting. However, I expect that we should have some clear plan about how the decision will be made. So is it true, continuing the discussion in matter, is it the board that will decide it decided directly? I think it's important to note this and also the definition of the regions. We have been talking a lot about the regions and what is global south, what is GDP, et cetera. Where where will the continuation of the discussion be and where the decision will be? And finally, who will do all this? Is it going to be some election committee that will be coordinating or is it going to be the facilitation team that will try to report to the board and the board will make a decision? I mean, my question is very simple. How is this discussion going forward, given that we really want something to happen here?
[01:24:22] Yep, thank you for the question.
[01:24:29] Following on our side to it, and I totally agree with the questions that you raised, I do just want to ask that I think this is fantastic, that this is happening.
[01:24:42] You know, is there any scope within the appointed seats or so to think about this? That's one of my questions. Or does it have to be within the framework of the community elections?
[01:24:56] And the second question is, how can it be done in a way that gives it the gives these seats the best possible credibility within the movement so that they do not get seen as somehow lesser seats or there's no sort of hierarchy created between the rest of the elections and these seats. So I think thinking about that is really important and can also could also be a factor in determining the timing of these elections.
[01:25:43] Just one quick point, I think definitely it's a huge nightmare that will define diversity as just communities and then we're done, we have diversity and then we have the experts and the diversity like tokenized cities. It's a huge nightmare, definitely. So we should have diversity across the board. And I think appointed it should actually set the example. There should be more, not less diverse. But what I would say is that we have this rubric for people running to the board. I am a huge proponent of using this rubric also for appointed seats.
[01:26:18] And there are skills, expertise, diversity, experience, all of those things. And they should be treated equally because, you know, bringing understanding of the community, bringing understanding of the diversity of these specific regions of LGBT. And all this is valuable and should count, but not just for the communities. It's obviously.
[01:26:44] Thank you, Richard. You have your hands full.
[01:26:48] So, yeah, I just I just want to sort of echo direction. And I guess my observation is that some people in the definition foundation, maybe even Katherine Harris, said that, you know, the the the diversity is well represented at the board appointed level and and community seats need to catch up. I mean, I don't think that's a fair characterization in a number of ways. The community seats have been more have been more diverse and more representative. And we you know, we should we should realize that and we should handle it and we should enhance them in both in both sides of it.
[01:27:20] Yeah, I think at this point, in fact, it is called there are some people who have a great profile about several hats that maybe it's needed for four elections because I want to see someone talking about credibility. I'm not sure who. But yet for some people in the movement, the amount of allegiance or the participation like like another meaning some very valuable. But but the other hand is for other people, the experience, like a Wikimedia, it's very valuable.
[01:28:00] And in addition, that people have skills like like Bishan, like some good level of English, whatever. So I think in this school there are some nice profiles of people who accomplish diversity, who are part of or who are part of a region who are not exactly the Western religions, who are always the same story because they noise in the background this morning here in Mexico. So I think in this point in this school and watching someone faces that fulfill the needs of diversity that are part of LGBT people, that are part of some countries who have difficulties and having to rest and are having immigrants are hoping that maybe we are just only trying to find that profiles and ensure give them some conditions to ensure their participation.
[01:28:57] Like like we mentioned it like Esteban's life somewhere.
[01:29:03] I love the idea of their use of something like a school or something like a space for increase the skills of the people, you know, that kind of support.
[01:29:13] Thank you.
[01:29:16] Thank you. We'll take the last comment or question from Euphemia and Depositional.
[01:29:23] Ok, thank you so much. Just a follow up to what they say about a balance between the skills experience and the rest of it. I know that across several communities, when you talk about skills and experience, they're not always the same, maybe less in Africa, for example, once to work, maybe as a very skillful said, for this particular personal experience might differ from somebody else's experience in Asia. So I'm just wondering what strategy we're using to ensure that we balance this out to accommodate all of these differences.
[01:30:05] Thanks for the question. But I would like to conclude the session and then we can anyone can answer the questions and also we can have an informal conversation. I would like to say thank you to everyone for joining us.
[01:30:21] To the panelists. This is the last of the four panel discussion that we had and also probably the last meeting of the entire six weeks called for that process. And so we can still stay on. Both of the moderators will still stay and but the recording will stop. But if you still have questions, comment that we just like to have an informal chat.