[Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
37 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

Frans Grijzenhout
Hi Remi, You're mail is one big complaint, may I remind you to the last
phrase of your Board Handbook? It states: Fortes capacité d’auto-évaluation
​ (​Strong self-assessment capability). Thank you, Frans


*Frans Grijzenhout*, voorzitter / chair
+31 6 5333 9499
--
*Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland*
Mariaplaats 3  -  3511 LH Utrecht
Kamer van Koophandel 17189036
http://www.wikimedia.nl/

2017-10-20 13:49 GMT+02:00 Rémi Mathis <[hidden email]>:

> Katherine,
>
> I told you a month ago "Maybe you should reply as a responsible human being
> and not as a trained crisis communication people". This is truer everyday.
>
> What did you write this email yesterday, and not one,two, three months ago?
> Because I left Wikimedia France, because a Fields Medallist left, because
> the president of Picasso Museum left, and because journalists began to talk
> about the harassment and the violence of some members of the community.
> Because the fact that Nathalie Martin had filed a complaint against
> Christophe Henner begins to spread not only amongst the community but also
> outside.
> Because the articles made people aware of the problem and that they are
> victims too, and new testimonies are being sent to journalists.
> Because you met Christophe Henner in person the day before.
>
> Because you are doing your job to protect your boss and make as little
> noise as possible. But when I donate to Wikimedia, when I edit Wikipedia,
> that's not what I want from you. I want a safe community.
>
> I wrote to you, Christophe and your team more than ten times between July
> and today. I even met your Legal Conselor and Christophe Henner to talk
> about the harassment. I never got an email back from you. Not a single word
> to a private message I sent. You only answered once on Twitter, because it
> was a public conversation.
>
> Now, I'm for you "an individual", you never only *say my name*.
> At the same time, I receive a letter from Henner's lawyer trying to make me
> remove my post.
> Still keeping people quiet instead of accepting and therefore tackling the
> problems.
>
> I spent nine years working for the movement as a benevolent member. I have
> been chair for 3 years, I worked 9-12pm for the movement for years, I was
> threatened by the French Intelligence Service. And thanks to this
> dedication, I made a lot of friends ; I met a lot of extraordinay people ;
> we contracted with the Bibliothèque nationale, Versailles Palace,
> Ministries, etc. We made a huge and very good job.
>
> Now, do you really think I'm leaving with no reason? Do you really think
> I'm a liar or frivolous? Do you think I'm being manipulated by an evil
> witch we had to get rid of - as some say to journalists and some add (with
> neutrality of course) to the Wikipedia article about me?
>
> Denouncing the violence, I'm losing 30 of my closest friends, stopping one
> of my favouriste activities and canceling 9 years of my life.
>
> Sending an email like this one, "managing" instead of "caring", you only do
> the job you're getting paid for.
> But, maybe you also realise that you are shatterring lives of
> "individuals"... who have no names. But since we don't even have names,
> since there is no violence or harassment problem to deal with, I'm sure you
> will never have any problem to look at yourself in a mirror.
>
> Even Hollywood is facing the violence and harassment problem. Wikimedia
> still doesn't.
> I'm sad. But now I'm only sad for you and one of the greatest human
> projects of the time, you are currently making vile and foul.
> As for me, it's over.
>
> X, individual [used to be] associated with our movement
>
>
>
>
> On 19 October 2017 at 23:19, Katherine Maher <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Everyone,
> >
> > The past six months have been a complex and troubling time for our
> > community in France. Let me be absolutely clear, with no confusion or
> > ambiguity, that the Wikimedia Foundation condemns harassment. We take all
> > harassment claims seriously, investigate them promptly, and take the
> > appropriate action to enforce our policies whenever necessary. My goal
> here
> > today is to provide more information about the actions of the Wikimedia
> > Foundation, the principles to which we adhere, and the situation in which
> > our movement finds itself.
> >
> > As many of you know, there have been months of discussion within the
> French
> > Wikimedia community, independent committees and governance bodies, and
> the
> > Wikimedia Foundation about the governance and operations of Wikimédia
> > France. During this time, we have seen growing tensions between a number
> of
> > the former leaders of Wikimédia France and some members of the French
> > Wikimedia community. This situation created great strain on the French
> > community, former and current staff of Wikimédia France, and concerned
> > Wikimedia volunteers around the world. Much of this was documented by
> > community members[1] and in the press.[2] Over the past months the
> > Foundation has received formal and informal complaints alleging
> harassment
> > and other harmful behaviour, and we have enforced existing policies
> > whenever applicable.
> >
> > Recently, an individual associated with our movement published an essay
> > about the events in France on the blogging site Medium and shared that
> > essay with this list. It contained a number of deeply concerning
> > allegations of harassment. Let me first address the most troubling claims
> > of the recent essay—those regarding the Foundation’s handling of
> > allegations against the Wikimedia Foundation’s current Board Chair.
> >
> > In May of 2017 the Wikimedia Foundation was informed, in a letter and for
> > the first time, that the then-Executive Director of Wikimédia France was
> > alleging claims of harassment against the current Board Chair of the
> > Wikimedia Foundation, dating back to his tenure as former Chair of
> > Wikimédia France. In this letter the Executive Director described a
> number
> > of interactions with the Foundation’s Board Chair when he was Chair of
> > Wikimédia France, and went on to accuse him of using his position as
> > Foundation Board Chair to to turn the Wikimedia Foundation’s sentiment
> > against the French chapter.
> >
> > Contrary to the assertion in the Medium essay, while the former Wikimédia
> > France Executive Director’s letter detailed tense and disagreeable
> > interactions between the two individuals, it did not characterize those
> > interactions as sexual harassment. Also contrary to the essay’s
> assertions,
> > the Wikimedia Foundation took immediate and appropriate action after
> > receiving the complaint.
> >
> > The Wikimedia Foundation, under clear direction from our Board, responded
> > promptly:
> >
> >    - We notified the Vice Chair and Board Governance Chair immediately
> >    after receiving the then-Executive Director’s letter.
> >    - Under their direction and supervision, we promptly hired expert
> French
> >    legal counsel to conduct an investigation on this issue.
> >    - The Foundation Board Chair was informed of the investigation and
> >    recused from all relevant discussions. The Board Chair was also
> recused
> >    from any discussion regarding Wikimédia France and the French
> Wikimedia
> >    community, including any participation in funding decisions.
> >    - The investigation by the experts found that the French chapter’s
> >    Executive Director’s detailed statements of facts, in addition to not
> > being
> >    characterized by her as sexual harassment, also did not support a
> > finding
> >    of sexual harassment.
> >    - Based on the information provided, French counsel also looked at
> >    whether the allegations supported a finding of “moral” harassment,
> >    ultimately concluding that they did not.
> >    - The findings were conveyed to the then-chair of the board of
> Wikimédia
> >    France. The chapter leadership was asked on more than one occasion if
> it
> >    had any additional evidence or wished to further discuss the
> > conclusions.
> >    No additional information was provided.
> >    - Under these circumstances, the Board of the Wikimedia Foundation
> found
> >    no merit to the charges.
> >
> >
> > *As has been repeatedly stated, the Foundation remains fully committed to
> > reviewing and investigating additional information, if presented, of
> sexual
> > or other harassment allegedly committed by any Wikimedia Foundation staff
> > or board member. We fully condemn harassment in the Wikimedia movement.*
> >
> > The essay in Medium also references experiences of a number of former
> > Wikimédia France Board members who reportedly left their posts because of
> > alleged harassment from French Wikimedia community members. In the
> majority
> > of these cases, the Wikimedia Foundation has not received complaints and
> > has no further information about these allegations.
> >
> > We are aware that some people working at the Foundation for some months
> > have received comments from a number of community members through
> informal
> > channels about alleged intra-community harassment. These included
> > complaints and allegations of harassment made against the former
> Wikimédia
> > France Executive Director and then-Board Chair by Wikimédia France staff
> > and community members, as well as counter-complaints from former
> Wikimédia
> > France board members against members of the French community. In each
> > instance of which we are aware, the individual raising the complaint was
> > directed to the Wikimedia Foundation’s Support and Safety team, which is
> > trained and equipped to independently investigate and assess these
> matters,
> > particularly where members of the larger Wikimedia community are
> concerned.
> >
> > In total, the Foundation received roughly a dozen of these complaints.
> Each
> > of these complaints received by the Foundation was investigated and
> > responded to promptly, enforcing the relevant anti-harassment policies
> > whenever appropriate. In some cases, and when appropriate, our response
> > resulted in content (for example, content that identified Wikimedia
> > community members who guarded their anonymity) being removed from public
> > websites or the Foundation contacting users who posted inappropriate
> > material. In others, we found that while certain comments at times
> crossed
> > the lines of civility, the actions did not meet the threshold of sanction
> > under our policies or constitute intentional or sustained patterns of
> > harassment.
> >
> > As a cumulative result of these complaints, the Wikimedia Foundation has
> > recommended to Wikimédia France that they take immediate steps to
> implement
> > a friendly space policy. At the chapter’s exceptional September general
> > assembly, the motion to develop and implement a friendly space policy
> > passed with overwhelming support, with 98% of the membership voting in
> > favor.[3] The Wikimedia Foundation has offered Wikimédia France our
> > assistance with this policy’s composition and implementation.
> >
> > We are committed to working with the new Wikimédia France conseil
> > d’administration (governing board) to support the French community as
> they
> > work to address and resolve these and other outstanding issues. The
> > Wikimedia Foundation and the new leadership of Wikimédia France are
> already
> > cooperating to address the governance-related concerns raised by the
> > volunteer Funds Dissemination Committee in the first half of 2017. As
> part
> > of this work, we have encouraged them to review how they will
> independently
> > handle claims of harassment in the future. The Wikimedia Foundation and
> > Wikimédia France share a common goal: a healthy, welcoming, respectful,
> > inclusive Wikimedia community in France.
> >
> > I know I am not alone in my dismay for how these events have unfolded.
> Many
> > dedicated, good-faith members of the French community, including current
> > community members and present and former Wikimédia France board and staff
> > members, have experienced distress and anxiety over recent months. Those
> > outside of the community have watched with dismay as our peers and
> friends
> > have found themselves disoriented, distressed, alienated, or at odds with
> > one another. And yet we also know that many in France now feel a renewed
> > sense of purpose for building the healthy and welcoming community we all
> > desire.
> >
> > Situations such as the recent events in France provide us with an
> > opportunity to learn from the past in order to do better in the future.
> We
> > have seen this time and again in our communities, as organizations
> > (including the Wikimedia Foundation) have emerged from governance and
> other
> > challenges stronger, with deepened commitments to openness,
> collaboration,
> > and humility.
> >
> > Today is another such opportunity.
> >
> > Katherine
> >
> > [1] https://www.mathisbenguigui.eu/wikimedia-timeline/
> >
> > [2]
> > http://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2017/09/11/vers-une-
> > sortie-de-crise-a-wikimedia-france_5184101_4408996.html
> >
> > http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/rue89/rue89-nos-vies-
> > connectees/20170718.OBS2248/exclusions-menaces-budget-
> > recale-c-est-la-crise-chez-wikimedia-france.html
> >
> >
> > [3]
> > https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/04/
> > WMFR_AG_2017-09-09.pdf/page1-2550px-WMFR_AG_2017-09-09.pdf.jpg
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Caroline Becker <
> [hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Emeric,
> > >
> > > I am very pleased that you take mental health seriously. I remember,
> not
> > so
> > > long ago, that your actions while you were in Wikimedia France had
> > serious
> > > impact on the mental health of at least two of your members.
> > >
> > > In January, someone had a meltdown just in front of you. Could you
> remind
> > > us what you did after that ?
> > >
> > > In April, you learnt that your actions as a chair caused me a medical
> > > leave. What can the Foundation and the movement as a whole learn about
> > how
> > > you dealt with the situation ?
> > >
> > > Warmly,
> > >
> > > Caroline
> > >
> > > 2017-10-12 12:39 GMT+02:00 Emeric Vallespi <[hidden email]
> >:
> > >
> > > > Dear Maria,
> > > > Dear all,
> > > >
> > > > The Wikimedia Foundation board of trustees, the executive and the
> legal
> > > > management of the Wikimedia Foundation have been informed of Nathalie
> > > > Martin's complaint against her former employer now member of your
> > board,
> > > > and then of the criminal complaint against this same person (facts
> from
> > > his
> > > > time in Wikimédia France and other from his time in your Board).
> > > >
> > > > It would have been logical for a board of trustees member to gather
> her
> > > > testimony. No one has sought to make contact with her. Why?
> > > > At the very least, the Wikimedia Foundation board of trustees could
> > have
> > > > requested a copy of the complaint, as well as the various
> testimonies,
> > so
> > > > that they could study them and make their opinion. We had no
> > > solicitation.
> > > > Why?
> > > > From what I see, the Wikimedia Foundation has done everything to
> stifle
> > > > the problem. Here is the only initiative WMF has taken: paid
> > "independent
> > > > lawyers" (a concept unknown to me…) to "question Christophe". He
> > > responded,
> > > > to the general surprise, that there was no problem.
> > > > Do you really feel that this is a serious investigation? Honestly?
> > > > Why did not these lawyers also hear Nathalie?
> > > > Why did these lawyers not ask questions to the Wikimédia France Board
> > of
> > > > trustees members? Only with the testimony of the defendant himself,
> the
> > > > Wikimedia Foundation today states that there is no problem. ...
> > > > During the site visit, Nathalie proposed to the Wikimedia Foundation
> > > > representatives to organize a confrontation. Not only did she have a
> > flat
> > > > denial, but, moreover, it was replied that it must not be addressed.
> > > > Why did the Wikimedia Foundation not accede to this request for
> > > > confrontation? Not to know the truth which can be too embarrassing to
> > > > assume?
> > > >
> > > > We have a movement employee who brilliantly held management
> > > > responsibilities for 4 years (great longevity for an Executive
> > Director…)
> > > > who asked for help. And what is the answer of the movement, of the
> > > > Wikimedia Foundation? Nothing. Nothing was undertaken to give her any
> > > kind
> > > > of listening or help.
> > > >
> > > > Marie-Alice Mathis, who courageously expressed disapproval of the
> > sexist
> > > > harassment of Nathalie, was also harassed by community members.
> > Nathalie
> > > > and Marie-Alice suffered health damages and had medical leaves issued
> > by
> > > > real general practitioners. The Wikimedia Foundation was informed and
> > > what
> > > > did you do? Nothing, or worst: two messages from your staff
> > legitimizing
> > > > the harassment and one from a member of your board who publicly
> stated
> > > > against Wikimédia France without any prior contact with us.
> > > > What kind of help or support did you offer to Marie-Alice?
> > > >
> > > > The outcome of the complaints is not even the issue at this stage and
> > > this
> > > > is not my point (I’m not a judge as you or other community member
> think
> > > > they are).
> > > > The real problem is that today a man in the movement, if he has power
> > > > position, can do absolutely everything he wants without any control.
> > The
> > > > problem is, despite all the empty values you’re communicating on, you
> > > > legitimize whatever the community does. Because the community is the
> > > > measure of all things.
> > > > No objective process is foreseen to protect women (and more
> generally,
> > > > people) or at least to hear them.
> > > > Do you find this normal for a movement that advocates inclusiveness
> and
> > > > respect?
> > > >
> > > > I’ve read an ardent defender of epicene style of writing who is
> > accusing
> > > > of lying other women because of their private then public
> declarations.
> > > > Having no clue of what is in the procedure. Thank you for
> enlightening
> > me
> > > > about true fight with feminism.
> > > >
> > > > I’m glad that « We take all allegations of harassment seriously »,
> but
> > I
> > > > can not endorse this functioning which goes against legality and
> simply
> > > > against human values.
> > > >
> > > > N.B: English is not my native language, may you be as tolerant of my
> > > > selected words or sentences construction as with harassing behavior.
> > > Thanks
> > > > for your understanding.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > --
> > > > Emeric Vallespi
> > > >
> > > > > On 11 Oct 2017, at 19:54, María Sefidari <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Dear all,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > We would like to specifically address the allegations related to
> > > > harassment
> > > > > in this thread’s original email. We take all allegations of
> > harassment
> > > > > seriously. Earlier this year, the Board of Trustees was informed
> that
> > > > > allegations of harassment had been made against the Wikimedia
> > > Foundation
> > > > > Board Chair dating back to his time as chair of Wikimédia France.
> We
> > > > > immediately directed the Foundation to investigate. The Foundation
> > > > employed
> > > > > independent, external experts and conducted an investigation. Based
> > on
> > > > the
> > > > > information presented, the investigation found no support for the
> > > > > allegations. That conclusion was conveyed to the Wikimedia
> Foundation
> > > > Board
> > > > > as well as the chair of Wikimédia France.
> > > > >
> > > > > The Wikimedia Foundation remains committed to independent
> > investigation
> > > > if
> > > > > presented with new information. Absent such information, we
> consider
> > > the
> > > > > allegations to be without merit.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On behalf of the Board,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > María Sefidari
> > > > >
> > > > > El 8 oct. 2017 5:20, "John Erling Blad" <[hidden email]>
> escribió:
> > > > >
> > > > > When I first saw the posts I thought it would probably be more
> > opinions
> > > > to
> > > > > them than the very clear blame-game that were going on. Having a
> > partly
> > > > > anonymous community and a chapter that only represents some of the
> > > users
> > > > > are an invitation to fierce battles.
> > > > >
> > > > > Whatever going on at WMFR, I believe it is time for reevaluating
> the
> > > role
> > > > > of WMF in this. I'm wondering if there should be a new board for
> WMF,
> > > > > unless they get a new chair themselves asap. Reorganize, solve the
> > > > > problems, and move on.
> > > > >
> > > > > No, I do not know any of the people involved.
> > > > >
> > > > > John Erling Blad
> > > > > /jeblad
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Marie-Alice Mathis <
> > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hello all,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I haven’t had a real opportunity to introduce myself: I am
> > Marie-Alice
> > > > >> Mathis, 32, a now ex-member of the Board of Wikimédia France.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The transition with the newly elected members of the Board is now
> > > > complete
> > > > >> and I gladly step down to get away from the violence, exhaustion
> and
> > > > >> frustration of these past few months.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I was a Board candidate because after completing my PhD I finally
> > had
> > > > more
> > > > >> time to contribute to the projects and serve the community through
> > the
> > > > >> French chapter: after watching my husband Rémi Mathis do it for
> > years
> > > I
> > > > > had
> > > > >> a pretty good idea of what it meant. I did not know our ED
> Nathalie
> > > > Martin
> > > > >> or our chair Émeric Vallespi before working with them, and now
> that
> > I
> > > > have
> > > > >> I can vouch for their hard work and attachment to the movement’s
> > > values.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Today, I have lost friends or people I thought were friends
> because
> > I
> > > > >> defended Nathalie and Émeric in good faith during the smear
> campaign
> > > > based
> > > > >> on the community’s assumption that they were the source and cause
> of
> > > all
> > > > >> the chapter’s problems, real or perceived. Although I have worked
> > with
> > > > > them
> > > > >> closely for a year, I have been repeatedly informed that I’ve been
> > > > >> manipulated by Nathalie from the start and should not have blindly
> > > > > believed
> > > > >> everything Émeric was saying. I’ve been personally attacked on WMF
> > > > sites,
> > > > >> email lists, and social media for weeks, my every word
> scrutinised,
> > > > >> questioned and mocked assuming I was either ignorant or lying.
> I’ve
> > > been
> > > > >> told by so-called feminists who were endorsing a particularly
> sexist
> > > > rant
> > > > >> against me to “stop making inflammatory comments”. I’ve been
> called
> > a
> > > > >> conspiracy theorist because I questioned the role of our former
> > chair
> > > > >> Christophe Henner, now chair of the Board at the WMF, in the
> threats
> > > to
> > > > >> withdraw our chapter agreement and the cutting of half our FDC
> > > funding.
> > > > >> People close to Christophe who have resigned from the WMFR Board
> > early
> > > > in
> > > > >> the crisis rather than take responsibility for their mistakes now
> > call
> > > > >> themselves victims and whistleblowers. The WMF, who is perfectly
> > aware
> > > > of
> > > > >> the charges of sexual harassment filed by Nathalie against
> > Christophe
> > > > for
> > > > >> facts dating back to when he was her boss at Wikimédia France, is
> > > > >> pretending WMFR leadership has used the threat of legal action to
> > > > >> intimidate chapter members and silence opposition.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Some unfounded allegations have been made on this very list by
> > > prominent
> > > > >> members of the community (and what is a newbie’s word worth in
> that
> > > > case,
> > > > >> right?): from extremely serious accusations of misuse of chapter
> > funds
> > > > for
> > > > >> personal gain (that strangely enough never made it to the French
> > > justice
> > > > >> system despite a so-called “rather convincing rationale”), to
> > > gratuitous
> > > > >> ones that Nathalie was making the Board’s decisions for us and
> > > dictating
> > > > >> our communication (I am old enough to write my own emails, thank
> you
> > > > very
> > > > >> much), to ever vague ones of “quite generous expenses
> > reimbursement“.
> > > > None
> > > > >> of this has been supported by proof or tangible facts, but the
> goal
> > of
> > > > >> spreading distrust and dissent in the chapter and the wider
> > community
> > > > has
> > > > >> clearly been reached. Even now that Nathalie has left her position
> > and
> > > > the
> > > > >> Board has resigned, some are still defaming her in the French
> media
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > >> hopes of winning the stupid argument of who were the bad guys in
> the
> > > > >> crisis.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I am also extremely disappointed that no one from this list asked
> us
> > > > (the
> > > > >> Board) what was happening when these allegations were made, with
> > only
> > > a
> > > > >> handful of people suggesting to wait before all the facts were
> > known.
> > > > >> Instead, you took for granted the very short and extremely biased
> > > > English
> > > > >> summaries of the Board’s communications (which were instantly
> > > circulated
> > > > > on
> > > > >> this list without our consent and in violation of our chapter’s
> > > bylaws),
> > > > >> and joined in the chorus of outrage, condemnation and verbal
> abuse.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> But worse to me than all this, I am actually terrified at how
> easily
> > > the
> > > > >> Wikimedia community can turn on a person, with no regard
> whatsoever
> > > for
> > > > >> decency or legality, when it has made up its mind about who has no
> > > place
> > > > >> there. I have personally experienced what it means to disagree
> with
> > > this
> > > > >> angry mob: questioning the dominant opinion or calling out
> > > individuals’
> > > > >> toxic behaviour makes you in turn acceptable collateral damage
> and a
> > > > “fair
> > > > >> game” target for harassment.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Speaking of this, the movement as a whole needs to address the
> issue
> > > of
> > > > >> staff-volunteers relations exemplified by the rapid turnover of
> > > > executive
> > > > >> staff across chapters. Nathalie stayed at WMFR an almost record
> > > > breaking 4
> > > > >> years, but at what cost? I’m being extremely serious in adding
> that
> > > this
> > > > >> conversation needs to take place before something irreversible
> > happens
> > > > as
> > > > > a
> > > > >> result of harmful group behaviour within the community.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Sincerely,
> > > > >> Marie-Alice Mathis // AlienSpoon
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> PS: for your information about my position regarding the WMF’s
> role
> > in
> > > > > this
> > > > >> crisis and their recent unilaterally added conditions [
> > > > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grant_expectations_for_
> > > > >> Wikimedia_France_-_2017-2018]
> > > > >> for payment of our FDC-attributed grant, I attach my email to Katy
> > > Love
> > > > >> from Sept 20.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Katy, (Cc WMFr Board and Rémi)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> In the WMF "Grant expectations" document sent to the Board of
> WMFr,
> > > you
> > > > >> mention as a condition for APG funds payment that I do not resign
> > from
> > > > my
> > > > >> position on the Board until the governance review is complete, and
> > > that
> > > > > any
> > > > >> Board member planning to resign must report and justify it to WMF.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> You also mention that you retain the right to cease funding WMFr
> if
> > > you
> > > > >> consider that legal threats are being used inappropriately to
> stifle
> > > > civil
> > > > >> and appropriate participation in the chapter. Moreover, you
> > condition
> > > > >> payment to being informed if the chapter leadership feels that
> legal
> > > > > action
> > > > >> is appropriate to take against current or former board members or
> > > staff.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Let me be clear: these conditions are outrageous and unacceptable.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> First of all, my legitimacy as a Board member of WMFr does not
> come
> > > from
> > > > >> any commitment to WMF but from being democratically elected by
> > French
> > > > >> chapter members. WMF has no say in who stays or not on the Board,
> > and
> > > > >> trying to intervene on such governance issues is, again, putting
> > both
> > > > >> organisations at risk of being legally recognised as co-employers.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Second, as a (volunteer) Board member I have been subjected to
> > > > harassment,
> > > > >> sexist abuse, and unjustified allegations of misconduct by
> community
> > > > >> members, that have impacted my health and mental well being to the
> > > point
> > > > >> where I was no longer able to do my (paid) job in cancer patient
> > care
> > > > and
> > > > >> my GP put me on medical leave. A large volume of this abuse took
> > place
> > > > on
> > > > >> WMF property (fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipédia:Le_Bistro
> <http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro>
> > <http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro>
> > > <http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro>
> > > > <http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro>
> > > > > <http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro>
> > > > >> <http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro>
> > > > >> <http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro> and the
> > > > >> WMF-hosted,
> > > > >> publicly archived mailing lists wikimedia-l and wikimediafr).
> > > > >> You personally and on behalf of WMF encouraged French community
> > > members
> > > > to
> > > > >> challenge chapter leadership citing governance issues, without a
> > word
> > > > >> mentioning the violence suffered by the Board and executive staff
> at
> > > the
> > > > >> hands of some French members during this crisis. Worse, you
> > presented
> > > > the
> > > > >> Board's email condemning the harassment as inaccurate and
> > problematic,
> > > > >> which made the community feel all the more legitimate in their
> > harmful
> > > > >> attacks.
> > > > >> When I reported the abuse in person to WMF employees during the
> site
> > > > visit
> > > > >> you personally empathised with my distress at the time, and
> thanked
> > me
> > > > for
> > > > >> being honest about how your email to the wikimediafr list had made
> > our
> > > > >> already precarious situation untenable. And then you did nothing.
> > > > >> My husband Rémi, who witnessed first hand the effects of the
> > > harassment
> > > > on
> > > > >> my health, called on you to release the site visit report so the
> > > > > misconduct
> > > > >> allegations would stop. You didn't, until 3 days before our
> General
> > > > >> Assembly (where the allegations were repeated), on the same day
> you
> > > > asked
> > > > >> that I stay on as a Board member. Even your choice of words in the
> > > > "Grant
> > > > >> expectations" document is telling: "egregious incivility" is not
> > what
> > > we
> > > > >> are talking about here. We are talking about unacceptable and
> > illegal
> > > > >> defamation and harassment with serious real life consequences.
> > > > >> Rémi also called on the wikimedia-l list to stop the unfounded
> > > > > allegations,
> > > > >> and was attacked in turn because of "his conflict of interest as
> the
> > > > >> husband of a Board member". He also reported the abuse to the WMF
> > > > >> governance committee, to the Suport and Safety team and mentioned
> it
> > > to
> > > > >> Christophe Henner and Katherine Maher on Twitter, to no avail. To
> > this
> > > > day
> > > > >> we haven't received any support or acknowledgement whatsoever. All
> > the
> > > > >> while the sexist abuse continues, and French editor MrButler was
> > > > moderated
> > > > >> on the wikimediafr maling list for his continued personal attacks
> > > > against
> > > > >> me. This is exactly the kind of behaviour the Board's email to the
> > > > members
> > > > >> was calling out, yet you continue to deliberately ignore it and
> > refuse
> > > > to
> > > > >> do anything about it.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Finally, your asking to be informed of any legal action against
> > > chapter
> > > > >> members or staff is yet another example of the WMF taking sides
> > while
> > > > >> posing as a neutral arbitrator. Calling someone out on their toxic
> > > > >> behaviour or actually filing a complaint are no legal threats or
> > > > >> intimidation, but by claiming they are you are trying to silence
> > > victims
> > > > > by
> > > > >> denying them their basic rights to legal protection. At least two
> > > > >> complaints have been filed against community members and more may
> be
> > > > >> coming, including on my behalf. You will not be informed because
> it
> > is
> > > > not
> > > > >> for WMF to decide whether they are justified or frivolous.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> For all these reasons I am deeply shocked and hurt by your payment
> > > > >> conditions and will not abide by the terms of your grant
> > expectations.
> > > > > With
> > > > >> most of WMFr funding hanging in the balance your unilaterally
> > revised
> > > > >> conditions amount to blackmail but I will not stay in harm's way
> at
> > > the
> > > > >> request of the organisation who has failed me in every aspect
> when I
> > > > came
> > > > >> in good faith to work for the community. I will resign when I see
> > fit
> > > to
> > > > >> protect my health, and continue to speak honestly and publicly
> about
> > > > your
> > > > >> actions and empty words of safety and inclusivity.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Sincerely,
> > > > >> Marie-Alice Mathis, vice chair of WMFr
> > > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > >> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > >> New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > > ,
> > > > >> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=
> > unsubscribe>
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=
> unsubscribe>
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Katherine Maher
> > Executive Director
> >
> > *We moved! **Our new address:*
> >
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> > 1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600
> > San Francisco, CA 94104
> >
> > +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635
> > +1 (415) 712 4873
> > [hidden email]
> > https://annual.wikimedia.org
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

Lodewijk
While this topic is painful and important, I don't have the feeling any
progress is being made by continuing this tirade on this mailing list.

I can see that hiring lawyers to investigate, will (at least in my culture)
always have a whiff of subjectivity. Even though this seems (from what I
understand) to be the default approach in the US, which is the primary
context in which the WMF operates. I would like to emphasize one sentence
in Katherine's email: "the Foundation remains fully committed to reviewing
and investigating additional information, if presented, of sexual or other
harassment allegedly committed by any Wikimedia Foundation staff or board
member. " This sounds to me as an invitation to the plaintiffs (*) to
request to reopen the investigation and present further testimony and
evidence. For obvious privacy concerns, I imagine this won't happen in
public. I hope that they will make use of this offer.

What I don't see however, is what the alternate pathway is that the
plaintiffs have in mind. It is suggested that this is a complaint that has
been filed with the judicial system in France, which makes it even harder
for anyone involved to publicly comment (while I'm not legally schooled, I
suspect that any lawyer would probably advise against it). Therefore, I
don't have the impression that continuing the very personal discussion
about individuals without offering an alternative pathway is particularly
helpful - especially as we don't even know in detail what the allegations
are (a crucial piece of context). I'm even more concerned where discussions
start to be held through the media (although I'm not sure I misunderstood
that part).

The plaintiffs have however also mentioned that the general climate should
be improved. That seems a topic where public conversations can actually be
helpful. I don't have a shred of doubt that there was a toxic climate in
Wikimedia France. Both parties accuse each other for being responsible for
that. What I would be more interested in, is what you as the WMFR
community, or we as the international community, could have done to
de-escalate that situation much earlier. This is not the first conflict
situation in our movement, and I fear it'll be the last.

When the dust has settled a bit, I would be in favor of asking (a subset
of) the Affiliations Committee to look into the situation (and perhaps
similar conflicts in other communities that were less visible), and come
with some recommendations. This will probably not be very satisfactory for
the involved parties where it comes to 'justice being done' - but it may
help avoid more pain in the future.

With a sad heart,

Lodewijk

(*) The reason I'm not mentioning people by name is not because I don't
respect them, but because I don't necessarily want this thread to turn up
in search results for eternity. I imagine others may have similar good
faith reasons.

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Frans Grijzenhout <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hi Remi, You're mail is one big complaint, may I remind you to the last
> phrase of your Board Handbook? It states: Fortes capacité d’auto-évaluation
> ​ (​Strong self-assessment capability). Thank you, Frans
>
>
> *Frans Grijzenhout*, voorzitter / chair
> +31 6 5333 9499
> --
> *Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland*
> Mariaplaats 3  -  3511 LH Utrecht
> Kamer van Koophandel 17189036
> http://www.wikimedia.nl/
>
> 2017-10-20 13:49 GMT+02:00 Rémi Mathis <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Katherine,
> >
> > I told you a month ago "Maybe you should reply as a responsible human
> being
> > and not as a trained crisis communication people". This is truer
> everyday.
> >
> > What did you write this email yesterday, and not one,two, three months
> ago?
> > Because I left Wikimedia France, because a Fields Medallist left, because
> > the president of Picasso Museum left, and because journalists began to
> talk
> > about the harassment and the violence of some members of the community.
> > Because the fact that Nathalie Martin had filed a complaint against
> > Christophe Henner begins to spread not only amongst the community but
> also
> > outside.
> > Because the articles made people aware of the problem and that they are
> > victims too, and new testimonies are being sent to journalists.
> > Because you met Christophe Henner in person the day before.
> >
> > Because you are doing your job to protect your boss and make as little
> > noise as possible. But when I donate to Wikimedia, when I edit Wikipedia,
> > that's not what I want from you. I want a safe community.
> >
> > I wrote to you, Christophe and your team more than ten times between July
> > and today. I even met your Legal Conselor and Christophe Henner to talk
> > about the harassment. I never got an email back from you. Not a single
> word
> > to a private message I sent. You only answered once on Twitter, because
> it
> > was a public conversation.
> >
> > Now, I'm for you "an individual", you never only *say my name*.
> > At the same time, I receive a letter from Henner's lawyer trying to make
> me
> > remove my post.
> > Still keeping people quiet instead of accepting and therefore tackling
> the
> > problems.
> >
> > I spent nine years working for the movement as a benevolent member. I
> have
> > been chair for 3 years, I worked 9-12pm for the movement for years, I was
> > threatened by the French Intelligence Service. And thanks to this
> > dedication, I made a lot of friends ; I met a lot of extraordinay people
> ;
> > we contracted with the Bibliothèque nationale, Versailles Palace,
> > Ministries, etc. We made a huge and very good job.
> >
> > Now, do you really think I'm leaving with no reason? Do you really think
> > I'm a liar or frivolous? Do you think I'm being manipulated by an evil
> > witch we had to get rid of - as some say to journalists and some add
> (with
> > neutrality of course) to the Wikipedia article about me?
> >
> > Denouncing the violence, I'm losing 30 of my closest friends, stopping
> one
> > of my favouriste activities and canceling 9 years of my life.
> >
> > Sending an email like this one, "managing" instead of "caring", you only
> do
> > the job you're getting paid for.
> > But, maybe you also realise that you are shatterring lives of
> > "individuals"... who have no names. But since we don't even have names,
> > since there is no violence or harassment problem to deal with, I'm sure
> you
> > will never have any problem to look at yourself in a mirror.
> >
> > Even Hollywood is facing the violence and harassment problem. Wikimedia
> > still doesn't.
> > I'm sad. But now I'm only sad for you and one of the greatest human
> > projects of the time, you are currently making vile and foul.
> > As for me, it's over.
> >
> > X, individual [used to be] associated with our movement
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 19 October 2017 at 23:19, Katherine Maher <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Everyone,
> > >
> > > The past six months have been a complex and troubling time for our
> > > community in France. Let me be absolutely clear, with no confusion or
> > > ambiguity, that the Wikimedia Foundation condemns harassment. We take
> all
> > > harassment claims seriously, investigate them promptly, and take the
> > > appropriate action to enforce our policies whenever necessary. My goal
> > here
> > > today is to provide more information about the actions of the Wikimedia
> > > Foundation, the principles to which we adhere, and the situation in
> which
> > > our movement finds itself.
> > >
> > > As many of you know, there have been months of discussion within the
> > French
> > > Wikimedia community, independent committees and governance bodies, and
> > the
> > > Wikimedia Foundation about the governance and operations of Wikimédia
> > > France. During this time, we have seen growing tensions between a
> number
> > of
> > > the former leaders of Wikimédia France and some members of the French
> > > Wikimedia community. This situation created great strain on the French
> > > community, former and current staff of Wikimédia France, and concerned
> > > Wikimedia volunteers around the world. Much of this was documented by
> > > community members[1] and in the press.[2] Over the past months the
> > > Foundation has received formal and informal complaints alleging
> > harassment
> > > and other harmful behaviour, and we have enforced existing policies
> > > whenever applicable.
> > >
> > > Recently, an individual associated with our movement published an essay
> > > about the events in France on the blogging site Medium and shared that
> > > essay with this list. It contained a number of deeply concerning
> > > allegations of harassment. Let me first address the most troubling
> claims
> > > of the recent essay—those regarding the Foundation’s handling of
> > > allegations against the Wikimedia Foundation’s current Board Chair.
> > >
> > > In May of 2017 the Wikimedia Foundation was informed, in a letter and
> for
> > > the first time, that the then-Executive Director of Wikimédia France
> was
> > > alleging claims of harassment against the current Board Chair of the
> > > Wikimedia Foundation, dating back to his tenure as former Chair of
> > > Wikimédia France. In this letter the Executive Director described a
> > number
> > > of interactions with the Foundation’s Board Chair when he was Chair of
> > > Wikimédia France, and went on to accuse him of using his position as
> > > Foundation Board Chair to to turn the Wikimedia Foundation’s sentiment
> > > against the French chapter.
> > >
> > > Contrary to the assertion in the Medium essay, while the former
> Wikimédia
> > > France Executive Director’s letter detailed tense and disagreeable
> > > interactions between the two individuals, it did not characterize those
> > > interactions as sexual harassment. Also contrary to the essay’s
> > assertions,
> > > the Wikimedia Foundation took immediate and appropriate action after
> > > receiving the complaint.
> > >
> > > The Wikimedia Foundation, under clear direction from our Board,
> responded
> > > promptly:
> > >
> > >    - We notified the Vice Chair and Board Governance Chair immediately
> > >    after receiving the then-Executive Director’s letter.
> > >    - Under their direction and supervision, we promptly hired expert
> > French
> > >    legal counsel to conduct an investigation on this issue.
> > >    - The Foundation Board Chair was informed of the investigation and
> > >    recused from all relevant discussions. The Board Chair was also
> > recused
> > >    from any discussion regarding Wikimédia France and the French
> > Wikimedia
> > >    community, including any participation in funding decisions.
> > >    - The investigation by the experts found that the French chapter’s
> > >    Executive Director’s detailed statements of facts, in addition to
> not
> > > being
> > >    characterized by her as sexual harassment, also did not support a
> > > finding
> > >    of sexual harassment.
> > >    - Based on the information provided, French counsel also looked at
> > >    whether the allegations supported a finding of “moral” harassment,
> > >    ultimately concluding that they did not.
> > >    - The findings were conveyed to the then-chair of the board of
> > Wikimédia
> > >    France. The chapter leadership was asked on more than one occasion
> if
> > it
> > >    had any additional evidence or wished to further discuss the
> > > conclusions.
> > >    No additional information was provided.
> > >    - Under these circumstances, the Board of the Wikimedia Foundation
> > found
> > >    no merit to the charges.
> > >
> > >
> > > *As has been repeatedly stated, the Foundation remains fully committed
> to
> > > reviewing and investigating additional information, if presented, of
> > sexual
> > > or other harassment allegedly committed by any Wikimedia Foundation
> staff
> > > or board member. We fully condemn harassment in the Wikimedia
> movement.*
> > >
> > > The essay in Medium also references experiences of a number of former
> > > Wikimédia France Board members who reportedly left their posts because
> of
> > > alleged harassment from French Wikimedia community members. In the
> > majority
> > > of these cases, the Wikimedia Foundation has not received complaints
> and
> > > has no further information about these allegations.
> > >
> > > We are aware that some people working at the Foundation for some months
> > > have received comments from a number of community members through
> > informal
> > > channels about alleged intra-community harassment. These included
> > > complaints and allegations of harassment made against the former
> > Wikimédia
> > > France Executive Director and then-Board Chair by Wikimédia France
> staff
> > > and community members, as well as counter-complaints from former
> > Wikimédia
> > > France board members against members of the French community. In each
> > > instance of which we are aware, the individual raising the complaint
> was
> > > directed to the Wikimedia Foundation’s Support and Safety team, which
> is
> > > trained and equipped to independently investigate and assess these
> > matters,
> > > particularly where members of the larger Wikimedia community are
> > concerned.
> > >
> > > In total, the Foundation received roughly a dozen of these complaints.
> > Each
> > > of these complaints received by the Foundation was investigated and
> > > responded to promptly, enforcing the relevant anti-harassment policies
> > > whenever appropriate. In some cases, and when appropriate, our response
> > > resulted in content (for example, content that identified Wikimedia
> > > community members who guarded their anonymity) being removed from
> public
> > > websites or the Foundation contacting users who posted inappropriate
> > > material. In others, we found that while certain comments at times
> > crossed
> > > the lines of civility, the actions did not meet the threshold of
> sanction
> > > under our policies or constitute intentional or sustained patterns of
> > > harassment.
> > >
> > > As a cumulative result of these complaints, the Wikimedia Foundation
> has
> > > recommended to Wikimédia France that they take immediate steps to
> > implement
> > > a friendly space policy. At the chapter’s exceptional September general
> > > assembly, the motion to develop and implement a friendly space policy
> > > passed with overwhelming support, with 98% of the membership voting in
> > > favor.[3] The Wikimedia Foundation has offered Wikimédia France our
> > > assistance with this policy’s composition and implementation.
> > >
> > > We are committed to working with the new Wikimédia France conseil
> > > d’administration (governing board) to support the French community as
> > they
> > > work to address and resolve these and other outstanding issues. The
> > > Wikimedia Foundation and the new leadership of Wikimédia France are
> > already
> > > cooperating to address the governance-related concerns raised by the
> > > volunteer Funds Dissemination Committee in the first half of 2017. As
> > part
> > > of this work, we have encouraged them to review how they will
> > independently
> > > handle claims of harassment in the future. The Wikimedia Foundation and
> > > Wikimédia France share a common goal: a healthy, welcoming, respectful,
> > > inclusive Wikimedia community in France.
> > >
> > > I know I am not alone in my dismay for how these events have unfolded.
> > Many
> > > dedicated, good-faith members of the French community, including
> current
> > > community members and present and former Wikimédia France board and
> staff
> > > members, have experienced distress and anxiety over recent months.
> Those
> > > outside of the community have watched with dismay as our peers and
> > friends
> > > have found themselves disoriented, distressed, alienated, or at odds
> with
> > > one another. And yet we also know that many in France now feel a
> renewed
> > > sense of purpose for building the healthy and welcoming community we
> all
> > > desire.
> > >
> > > Situations such as the recent events in France provide us with an
> > > opportunity to learn from the past in order to do better in the future.
> > We
> > > have seen this time and again in our communities, as organizations
> > > (including the Wikimedia Foundation) have emerged from governance and
> > other
> > > challenges stronger, with deepened commitments to openness,
> > collaboration,
> > > and humility.
> > >
> > > Today is another such opportunity.
> > >
> > > Katherine
> > >
> > > [1] https://www.mathisbenguigui.eu/wikimedia-timeline/
> > >
> > > [2]
> > > http://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2017/09/11/vers-une-
> > > sortie-de-crise-a-wikimedia-france_5184101_4408996.html
> > >
> > > http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/rue89/rue89-nos-vies-
> > > connectees/20170718.OBS2248/exclusions-menaces-budget-
> > > recale-c-est-la-crise-chez-wikimedia-france.html
> > >
> > >
> > > [3]
> > > https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/04/
> > > WMFR_AG_2017-09-09.pdf/page1-2550px-WMFR_AG_2017-09-09.pdf.jpg
> > >
> > >
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

Joseph Seddon-4
I must echo Lodewijk's words.

Washing dirty linen in public is beneficial to no one and damages everyone
involved including those making the accusations. There will be and are
lessons to be learned but right now there is a huge chilling effect from
the presence of lawyers on many sides and there is nothing to be gained
from this thread. There are proper avenues to deal with this, and if you
deem them appropriate then use hem, but this place is not one of those
avenues.

Regards
Seddon

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> While this topic is painful and important, I don't have the feeling any
> progress is being made by continuing this tirade on this mailing list.
>
> I can see that hiring lawyers to investigate, will (at least in my culture)
> always have a whiff of subjectivity. Even though this seems (from what I
> understand) to be the default approach in the US, which is the primary
> context in which the WMF operates. I would like to emphasize one sentence
> in Katherine's email: "the Foundation remains fully committed to reviewing
> and investigating additional information, if presented, of sexual or other
> harassment allegedly committed by any Wikimedia Foundation staff or board
> member. " This sounds to me as an invitation to the plaintiffs (*) to
> request to reopen the investigation and present further testimony and
> evidence. For obvious privacy concerns, I imagine this won't happen in
> public. I hope that they will make use of this offer.
>
> What I don't see however, is what the alternate pathway is that the
> plaintiffs have in mind. It is suggested that this is a complaint that has
> been filed with the judicial system in France, which makes it even harder
> for anyone involved to publicly comment (while I'm not legally schooled, I
> suspect that any lawyer would probably advise against it). Therefore, I
> don't have the impression that continuing the very personal discussion
> about individuals without offering an alternative pathway is particularly
> helpful - especially as we don't even know in detail what the allegations
> are (a crucial piece of context). I'm even more concerned where discussions
> start to be held through the media (although I'm not sure I misunderstood
> that part).
>
> The plaintiffs have however also mentioned that the general climate should
> be improved. That seems a topic where public conversations can actually be
> helpful. I don't have a shred of doubt that there was a toxic climate in
> Wikimedia France. Both parties accuse each other for being responsible for
> that. What I would be more interested in, is what you as the WMFR
> community, or we as the international community, could have done to
> de-escalate that situation much earlier. This is not the first conflict
> situation in our movement, and I fear it'll be the last.
>
> When the dust has settled a bit, I would be in favor of asking (a subset
> of) the Affiliations Committee to look into the situation (and perhaps
> similar conflicts in other communities that were less visible), and come
> with some recommendations. This will probably not be very satisfactory for
> the involved parties where it comes to 'justice being done' - but it may
> help avoid more pain in the future.
>
> With a sad heart,
>
> Lodewijk
>
> (*) The reason I'm not mentioning people by name is not because I don't
> respect them, but because I don't necessarily want this thread to turn up
> in search results for eternity. I imagine others may have similar good
> faith reasons.
>
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Frans Grijzenhout <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Remi, You're mail is one big complaint, may I remind you to the last
> > phrase of your Board Handbook? It states: Fortes capacité
> d’auto-évaluation
> > ​ (​Strong self-assessment capability). Thank you, Frans
> >
> >
> > *Frans Grijzenhout*, voorzitter / chair
> > +31 6 5333 9499
> > --
> > *Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland*
> > Mariaplaats 3  -  3511 LH Utrecht
> > Kamer van Koophandel 17189036
> > http://www.wikimedia.nl/
> >
> > 2017-10-20 13:49 GMT+02:00 Rémi Mathis <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > > Katherine,
> > >
> > > I told you a month ago "Maybe you should reply as a responsible human
> > being
> > > and not as a trained crisis communication people". This is truer
> > everyday.
> > >
> > > What did you write this email yesterday, and not one,two, three months
> > ago?
> > > Because I left Wikimedia France, because a Fields Medallist left,
> because
> > > the president of Picasso Museum left, and because journalists began to
> > talk
> > > about the harassment and the violence of some members of the community.
> > > Because the fact that Nathalie Martin had filed a complaint against
> > > Christophe Henner begins to spread not only amongst the community but
> > also
> > > outside.
> > > Because the articles made people aware of the problem and that they are
> > > victims too, and new testimonies are being sent to journalists.
> > > Because you met Christophe Henner in person the day before.
> > >
> > > Because you are doing your job to protect your boss and make as little
> > > noise as possible. But when I donate to Wikimedia, when I edit
> Wikipedia,
> > > that's not what I want from you. I want a safe community.
> > >
> > > I wrote to you, Christophe and your team more than ten times between
> July
> > > and today. I even met your Legal Conselor and Christophe Henner to talk
> > > about the harassment. I never got an email back from you. Not a single
> > word
> > > to a private message I sent. You only answered once on Twitter, because
> > it
> > > was a public conversation.
> > >
> > > Now, I'm for you "an individual", you never only *say my name*.
> > > At the same time, I receive a letter from Henner's lawyer trying to
> make
> > me
> > > remove my post.
> > > Still keeping people quiet instead of accepting and therefore tackling
> > the
> > > problems.
> > >
> > > I spent nine years working for the movement as a benevolent member. I
> > have
> > > been chair for 3 years, I worked 9-12pm for the movement for years, I
> was
> > > threatened by the French Intelligence Service. And thanks to this
> > > dedication, I made a lot of friends ; I met a lot of extraordinay
> people
> > ;
> > > we contracted with the Bibliothèque nationale, Versailles Palace,
> > > Ministries, etc. We made a huge and very good job.
> > >
> > > Now, do you really think I'm leaving with no reason? Do you really
> think
> > > I'm a liar or frivolous? Do you think I'm being manipulated by an evil
> > > witch we had to get rid of - as some say to journalists and some add
> > (with
> > > neutrality of course) to the Wikipedia article about me?
> > >
> > > Denouncing the violence, I'm losing 30 of my closest friends, stopping
> > one
> > > of my favouriste activities and canceling 9 years of my life.
> > >
> > > Sending an email like this one, "managing" instead of "caring", you
> only
> > do
> > > the job you're getting paid for.
> > > But, maybe you also realise that you are shatterring lives of
> > > "individuals"... who have no names. But since we don't even have names,
> > > since there is no violence or harassment problem to deal with, I'm sure
> > you
> > > will never have any problem to look at yourself in a mirror.
> > >
> > > Even Hollywood is facing the violence and harassment problem. Wikimedia
> > > still doesn't.
> > > I'm sad. But now I'm only sad for you and one of the greatest human
> > > projects of the time, you are currently making vile and foul.
> > > As for me, it's over.
> > >
> > > X, individual [used to be] associated with our movement
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 19 October 2017 at 23:19, Katherine Maher <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Everyone,
> > > >
> > > > The past six months have been a complex and troubling time for our
> > > > community in France. Let me be absolutely clear, with no confusion or
> > > > ambiguity, that the Wikimedia Foundation condemns harassment. We take
> > all
> > > > harassment claims seriously, investigate them promptly, and take the
> > > > appropriate action to enforce our policies whenever necessary. My
> goal
> > > here
> > > > today is to provide more information about the actions of the
> Wikimedia
> > > > Foundation, the principles to which we adhere, and the situation in
> > which
> > > > our movement finds itself.
> > > >
> > > > As many of you know, there have been months of discussion within the
> > > French
> > > > Wikimedia community, independent committees and governance bodies,
> and
> > > the
> > > > Wikimedia Foundation about the governance and operations of Wikimédia
> > > > France. During this time, we have seen growing tensions between a
> > number
> > > of
> > > > the former leaders of Wikimédia France and some members of the French
> > > > Wikimedia community. This situation created great strain on the
> French
> > > > community, former and current staff of Wikimédia France, and
> concerned
> > > > Wikimedia volunteers around the world. Much of this was documented by
> > > > community members[1] and in the press.[2] Over the past months the
> > > > Foundation has received formal and informal complaints alleging
> > > harassment
> > > > and other harmful behaviour, and we have enforced existing policies
> > > > whenever applicable.
> > > >
> > > > Recently, an individual associated with our movement published an
> essay
> > > > about the events in France on the blogging site Medium and shared
> that
> > > > essay with this list. It contained a number of deeply concerning
> > > > allegations of harassment. Let me first address the most troubling
> > claims
> > > > of the recent essay—those regarding the Foundation’s handling of
> > > > allegations against the Wikimedia Foundation’s current Board Chair.
> > > >
> > > > In May of 2017 the Wikimedia Foundation was informed, in a letter and
> > for
> > > > the first time, that the then-Executive Director of Wikimédia France
> > was
> > > > alleging claims of harassment against the current Board Chair of the
> > > > Wikimedia Foundation, dating back to his tenure as former Chair of
> > > > Wikimédia France. In this letter the Executive Director described a
> > > number
> > > > of interactions with the Foundation’s Board Chair when he was Chair
> of
> > > > Wikimédia France, and went on to accuse him of using his position as
> > > > Foundation Board Chair to to turn the Wikimedia Foundation’s
> sentiment
> > > > against the French chapter.
> > > >
> > > > Contrary to the assertion in the Medium essay, while the former
> > Wikimédia
> > > > France Executive Director’s letter detailed tense and disagreeable
> > > > interactions between the two individuals, it did not characterize
> those
> > > > interactions as sexual harassment. Also contrary to the essay’s
> > > assertions,
> > > > the Wikimedia Foundation took immediate and appropriate action after
> > > > receiving the complaint.
> > > >
> > > > The Wikimedia Foundation, under clear direction from our Board,
> > responded
> > > > promptly:
> > > >
> > > >    - We notified the Vice Chair and Board Governance Chair
> immediately
> > > >    after receiving the then-Executive Director’s letter.
> > > >    - Under their direction and supervision, we promptly hired expert
> > > French
> > > >    legal counsel to conduct an investigation on this issue.
> > > >    - The Foundation Board Chair was informed of the investigation and
> > > >    recused from all relevant discussions. The Board Chair was also
> > > recused
> > > >    from any discussion regarding Wikimédia France and the French
> > > Wikimedia
> > > >    community, including any participation in funding decisions.
> > > >    - The investigation by the experts found that the French chapter’s
> > > >    Executive Director’s detailed statements of facts, in addition to
> > not
> > > > being
> > > >    characterized by her as sexual harassment, also did not support a
> > > > finding
> > > >    of sexual harassment.
> > > >    - Based on the information provided, French counsel also looked at
> > > >    whether the allegations supported a finding of “moral” harassment,
> > > >    ultimately concluding that they did not.
> > > >    - The findings were conveyed to the then-chair of the board of
> > > Wikimédia
> > > >    France. The chapter leadership was asked on more than one occasion
> > if
> > > it
> > > >    had any additional evidence or wished to further discuss the
> > > > conclusions.
> > > >    No additional information was provided.
> > > >    - Under these circumstances, the Board of the Wikimedia Foundation
> > > found
> > > >    no merit to the charges.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > *As has been repeatedly stated, the Foundation remains fully
> committed
> > to
> > > > reviewing and investigating additional information, if presented, of
> > > sexual
> > > > or other harassment allegedly committed by any Wikimedia Foundation
> > staff
> > > > or board member. We fully condemn harassment in the Wikimedia
> > movement.*
> > > >
> > > > The essay in Medium also references experiences of a number of former
> > > > Wikimédia France Board members who reportedly left their posts
> because
> > of
> > > > alleged harassment from French Wikimedia community members. In the
> > > majority
> > > > of these cases, the Wikimedia Foundation has not received complaints
> > and
> > > > has no further information about these allegations.
> > > >
> > > > We are aware that some people working at the Foundation for some
> months
> > > > have received comments from a number of community members through
> > > informal
> > > > channels about alleged intra-community harassment. These included
> > > > complaints and allegations of harassment made against the former
> > > Wikimédia
> > > > France Executive Director and then-Board Chair by Wikimédia France
> > staff
> > > > and community members, as well as counter-complaints from former
> > > Wikimédia
> > > > France board members against members of the French community. In each
> > > > instance of which we are aware, the individual raising the complaint
> > was
> > > > directed to the Wikimedia Foundation’s Support and Safety team, which
> > is
> > > > trained and equipped to independently investigate and assess these
> > > matters,
> > > > particularly where members of the larger Wikimedia community are
> > > concerned.
> > > >
> > > > In total, the Foundation received roughly a dozen of these
> complaints.
> > > Each
> > > > of these complaints received by the Foundation was investigated and
> > > > responded to promptly, enforcing the relevant anti-harassment
> policies
> > > > whenever appropriate. In some cases, and when appropriate, our
> response
> > > > resulted in content (for example, content that identified Wikimedia
> > > > community members who guarded their anonymity) being removed from
> > public
> > > > websites or the Foundation contacting users who posted inappropriate
> > > > material. In others, we found that while certain comments at times
> > > crossed
> > > > the lines of civility, the actions did not meet the threshold of
> > sanction
> > > > under our policies or constitute intentional or sustained patterns of
> > > > harassment.
> > > >
> > > > As a cumulative result of these complaints, the Wikimedia Foundation
> > has
> > > > recommended to Wikimédia France that they take immediate steps to
> > > implement
> > > > a friendly space policy. At the chapter’s exceptional September
> general
> > > > assembly, the motion to develop and implement a friendly space policy
> > > > passed with overwhelming support, with 98% of the membership voting
> in
> > > > favor.[3] The Wikimedia Foundation has offered Wikimédia France our
> > > > assistance with this policy’s composition and implementation.
> > > >
> > > > We are committed to working with the new Wikimédia France conseil
> > > > d’administration (governing board) to support the French community as
> > > they
> > > > work to address and resolve these and other outstanding issues. The
> > > > Wikimedia Foundation and the new leadership of Wikimédia France are
> > > already
> > > > cooperating to address the governance-related concerns raised by the
> > > > volunteer Funds Dissemination Committee in the first half of 2017. As
> > > part
> > > > of this work, we have encouraged them to review how they will
> > > independently
> > > > handle claims of harassment in the future. The Wikimedia Foundation
> and
> > > > Wikimédia France share a common goal: a healthy, welcoming,
> respectful,
> > > > inclusive Wikimedia community in France.
> > > >
> > > > I know I am not alone in my dismay for how these events have
> unfolded.
> > > Many
> > > > dedicated, good-faith members of the French community, including
> > current
> > > > community members and present and former Wikimédia France board and
> > staff
> > > > members, have experienced distress and anxiety over recent months.
> > Those
> > > > outside of the community have watched with dismay as our peers and
> > > friends
> > > > have found themselves disoriented, distressed, alienated, or at odds
> > with
> > > > one another. And yet we also know that many in France now feel a
> > renewed
> > > > sense of purpose for building the healthy and welcoming community we
> > all
> > > > desire.
> > > >
> > > > Situations such as the recent events in France provide us with an
> > > > opportunity to learn from the past in order to do better in the
> future.
> > > We
> > > > have seen this time and again in our communities, as organizations
> > > > (including the Wikimedia Foundation) have emerged from governance and
> > > other
> > > > challenges stronger, with deepened commitments to openness,
> > > collaboration,
> > > > and humility.
> > > >
> > > > Today is another such opportunity.
> > > >
> > > > Katherine
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://www.mathisbenguigui.eu/wikimedia-timeline/
> > > >
> > > > [2]
> > > > http://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2017/09/11/vers-une-
> > > > sortie-de-crise-a-wikimedia-france_5184101_4408996.html
> > > >
> > > > http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/rue89/rue89-nos-vies-
> > > > connectees/20170718.OBS2248/exclusions-menaces-budget-
> > > > recale-c-est-la-crise-chez-wikimedia-france.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [3]
> > > > https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/04/
> > > > WMFR_AG_2017-09-09.pdf/page1-2550px-WMFR_AG_2017-09-09.pdf.jpg
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

Sylvain Boissel
In reply to this post by Katherine Maher
Hi Katherine,

2017-10-19 23:19 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher <[hidden email]>:

> [...]
>

> We are committed to working with the new Wikimédia France conseil
> d’administration (governing board) to support the French community as they
> work to address and resolve these and other outstanding issues. The
> Wikimedia Foundation and the new leadership of Wikimédia France are already
> cooperating to address the governance-related concerns raised by the
> volunteer Funds Dissemination Committee in the first half of 2017. As part
> of this work, we have encouraged them to review how they will independently
> handle claims of harassment in the future. The Wikimedia Foundation and
> Wikimédia France share a common goal: a healthy, welcoming, respectful,
> inclusive Wikimedia community in France.
>
> I know I am not alone in my dismay for how these events have unfolded. Many
> dedicated, good-faith members of the French community, including current
> community members and present and former Wikimédia France board and staff
> members, have experienced distress and anxiety over recent months. Those
> outside of the community have watched with dismay as our peers and friends
> have found themselves disoriented, distressed, alienated, or at odds with
> one another. And yet we also know that many in France now feel a renewed
> sense of purpose for building the healthy and welcoming community we all
> desire.
>

As the representative of the local branch of the labor union
ASSO-Solidaires at Wikimédia France, I wanted to thank you and the WMF
staff members who took part in the site visit in Paris in July  (namely
Katy Love, Winifred Olliff, Stephen Laporte and James Baldwin) for hearing
the distress of the staff members at a time when Wikimédia France's board
plainly refused to discuss with the staff.

I also wanted to confirm that things are getting better with the new board
elected in September.

I cannot speak about what my coworkers went through without asking them
first, but I can share an example from my own story: in February, I was
issued a « rappel à l'ordre » (warning) by the former direction and
board, accusing
me of disloyalty to the chapter because I had a girlfriend. It was
cancelled this month by the new board, and this is a huge relief to me.

Best regards,
Sylvain.

--
*Sylvain Boissel*
Délégué du personnel et Responsable de la section syndicale ASSO-Solidaires
*WIKIMÉDIA FRANCE*
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

Emeric Vallespi
Sylvain,

I have to answer to your email where you’re especially lying.
You say that you’re writing on behalf of a union section of the employees of Wikimedia France but I’m personally curious to know the weight of this union section. My question is actually: who else is represented by your email, if not yourself?

Moreover, you’re saying that you received a « warning » (?) because you had a girlfriend. Is it serious?
Your employer asked you to distinguish professional time and personal time. Indeed, you were reminded that you had to dedicate your work hours to the missions that were devoted to you and not to solve problems related to your personal life, especially if it interferes with organization’s activities and governance. It is also you who came, on your own, to tell us about the complexity of your personal and relationship situation in order to benefit of professional arrangements. The direction never looked for, nor asked, any information on this subject.

You’re mentioning the cancellation of the letter. Since, to my knowledge, no sanction has been filed to your HR record, I do not really see what have been canceled.
I can understand that supporting your new board of trustees, involved in the governance issues and in the criminal complaints filed is critical to show your loyalty.

Do you know how impatient am I to discover your next fable? I guess the only one never mentioned yet is maybe about a murder or something (although a streetfight scenario has already been invented x’D).

I think it was important to re-explain all those points so that the community, which is - again - unnecessarily taken as witness, is not deceived by a scenario built from scratch.
Again, to discredit the movement by such erroneous but public accusations still shows that only personal interests and vainness matter in this conflict with some people.

For months, several lies have been told by different people. Because the Wikimedia community protect itself and its members by harassing and defaming people who question the probity and integrity of some of its members doesn’t make of this lies the truth.

Best regards to all of you,
--
Emeric Vallespi

> On 22 Nov 2017, at 13:37, Sylvain Boissel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi Katherine,
>
> 2017-10-19 23:19 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher <[hidden email]>:
>
>> [...]
>
>> We are committed to working with the new Wikimédia France conseil
>> d’administration (governing board) to support the French community as they
>> work to address and resolve these and other outstanding issues. The
>> Wikimedia Foundation and the new leadership of Wikimédia France are already
>> cooperating to address the governance-related concerns raised by the
>> volunteer Funds Dissemination Committee in the first half of 2017. As part
>> of this work, we have encouraged them to review how they will independently
>> handle claims of harassment in the future. The Wikimedia Foundation and
>> Wikimédia France share a common goal: a healthy, welcoming, respectful,
>> inclusive Wikimedia community in France.
>>
>> I know I am not alone in my dismay for how these events have unfolded. Many
>> dedicated, good-faith members of the French community, including current
>> community members and present and former Wikimédia France board and staff
>> members, have experienced distress and anxiety over recent months. Those
>> outside of the community have watched with dismay as our peers and friends
>> have found themselves disoriented, distressed, alienated, or at odds with
>> one another. And yet we also know that many in France now feel a renewed
>> sense of purpose for building the healthy and welcoming community we all
>> desire.
>
> As the representative of the local branch of the labor union
> ASSO-Solidaires at Wikimédia France, I wanted to thank you and the WMF
> staff members who took part in the site visit in Paris in July  (namely
> Katy Love, Winifred Olliff, Stephen Laporte and James Baldwin) for hearing
> the distress of the staff members at a time when Wikimédia France's board
> plainly refused to discuss with the staff.
>
> I also wanted to confirm that things are getting better with the new board
> elected in September.
>
> I cannot speak about what my coworkers went through without asking them
> first, but I can share an example from my own story: in February, I was
> issued a « rappel à l'ordre » (warning) by the former direction and
> board, accusing
> me of disloyalty to the chapter because I had a girlfriend. It was
> cancelled this month by the new board, and this is a huge relief to me.
>
> Best regards,
> Sylvain.
>
> --
> *Sylvain Boissel*
> Délégué du personnel et Responsable de la section syndicale ASSO-Solidaires
> *WIKIMÉDIA FRANCE*
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

Xavier Combelle-2
Emeric,

When you say, that no sanction has filed his HR record, you are half or
completely lying.
The existence of a "rappel à l'ordre" (warning)
is an argument which can support fire someone of the staff so it should
be in a HR record.

In the same way Sylvain never said he is writing his email on behalf of
an union of the employees of Wikimedia France
but that he is the representative of the the employees of Wikimedia
France which is plenty true.

From the whole wikimedia france, movement, during the #wmfrgate, it was
only you Emeric and the old direction as a whole
that your declaration don't match the facts or your subsequent
declaration, as it it happened during the #bandeaugate in summer last year.

I have still to see the said "lies" from your opponent which contradicts
other public information (apart the words of you and the old direction)

Xavier Combelle

Le 23/11/2017 à 20:54, Emeric Vallespi a écrit :

> Sylvain,
>
> I have to answer to your email where you’re especially lying.
> You say that you’re writing on behalf of a union section of the employees of Wikimedia France but I’m personally curious to know the weight of this union section. My question is actually: who else is represented by your email, if not yourself?
>
> Moreover, you’re saying that you received a « warning » (?) because you had a girlfriend. Is it serious?
> Your employer asked you to distinguish professional time and personal time. Indeed, you were reminded that you had to dedicate your work hours to the missions that were devoted to you and not to solve problems related to your personal life, especially if it interferes with organization’s activities and governance. It is also you who came, on your own, to tell us about the complexity of your personal and relationship situation in order to benefit of professional arrangements. The direction never looked for, nor asked, any information on this subject.
>
> You’re mentioning the cancellation of the letter. Since, to my knowledge, no sanction has been filed to your HR record, I do not really see what have been canceled.
> I can understand that supporting your new board of trustees, involved in the governance issues and in the criminal complaints filed is critical to show your loyalty.
>
> Do you know how impatient am I to discover your next fable? I guess the only one never mentioned yet is maybe about a murder or something (although a streetfight scenario has already been invented x’D).
>
> I think it was important to re-explain all those points so that the community, which is - again - unnecessarily taken as witness, is not deceived by a scenario built from scratch.
> Again, to discredit the movement by such erroneous but public accusations still shows that only personal interests and vainness matter in this conflict with some people.
>
> For months, several lies have been told by different people. Because the Wikimedia community protect itself and its members by harassing and defaming people who question the probity and integrity of some of its members doesn’t make of this lies the truth.
>
> Best regards to all of you,
> --
> Emeric Vallespi
>
>> On 22 Nov 2017, at 13:37, Sylvain Boissel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Katherine,
>>
>> 2017-10-19 23:19 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher <[hidden email]>:
>>
>>> [...]
>>> We are committed to working with the new Wikimédia France conseil
>>> d’administration (governing board) to support the French community as they
>>> work to address and resolve these and other outstanding issues. The
>>> Wikimedia Foundation and the new leadership of Wikimédia France are already
>>> cooperating to address the governance-related concerns raised by the
>>> volunteer Funds Dissemination Committee in the first half of 2017. As part
>>> of this work, we have encouraged them to review how they will independently
>>> handle claims of harassment in the future. The Wikimedia Foundation and
>>> Wikimédia France share a common goal: a healthy, welcoming, respectful,
>>> inclusive Wikimedia community in France.
>>>
>>> I know I am not alone in my dismay for how these events have unfolded. Many
>>> dedicated, good-faith members of the French community, including current
>>> community members and present and former Wikimédia France board and staff
>>> members, have experienced distress and anxiety over recent months. Those
>>> outside of the community have watched with dismay as our peers and friends
>>> have found themselves disoriented, distressed, alienated, or at odds with
>>> one another. And yet we also know that many in France now feel a renewed
>>> sense of purpose for building the healthy and welcoming community we all
>>> desire.
>> As the representative of the local branch of the labor union
>> ASSO-Solidaires at Wikimédia France, I wanted to thank you and the WMF
>> staff members who took part in the site visit in Paris in July  (namely
>> Katy Love, Winifred Olliff, Stephen Laporte and James Baldwin) for hearing
>> the distress of the staff members at a time when Wikimédia France's board
>> plainly refused to discuss with the staff.
>>
>> I also wanted to confirm that things are getting better with the new board
>> elected in September.
>>
>> I cannot speak about what my coworkers went through without asking them
>> first, but I can share an example from my own story: in February, I was
>> issued a « rappel à l'ordre » (warning) by the former direction and
>> board, accusing
>> me of disloyalty to the chapter because I had a girlfriend. It was
>> cancelled this month by the new board, and this is a huge relief to me.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Sylvain.
>>
>> --
>> *Sylvain Boissel*
>> Délégué du personnel et Responsable de la section syndicale ASSO-Solidaires
>> *WIKIMÉDIA FRANCE*
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

metasj
In reply to this post by Emeric Vallespi
On Nov 23, 2017 2:55 PM, "Emeric Vallespi" <[hidden email]>
wrote:

<sniiip>

the Wikimedia community protect itself and its members by harassing and
defaming people who question


I cannot imagine why anyone would attempt to defame you, when they cannot
hope to surpass the eloquence and thoroughness of your own writing.

—Sam.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

Alphos OGame
In reply to this post by Emeric Vallespi
Good evening Émeric, good evening all.

Allow me to reply. Oh wait, that's right, I don't need you to allow the
publication of emails on this mailing list - this sure comes as a change,
and a welcome one too !

I won't be speaking of any member of the community, whether volunteer or
employee, it is not the purpose of this email.

You shockingly ask of a union representative the identities of other
unionized workers. It may come as a surprise to you, but, at least in
France, whether one is unionized or not is part of their private life, and
should in no circumstance be divulged by anyone other than themselves,
should they feel the desire to. That desire can't be coerced, and nobody
should rob someone else of their private life or its divulgation.
Aside from that, *in the unlikely event* the union section comprises a
single person, or roughly 10% of all Wikimédia France employees, that would
still be a feat, and more than the national average of about 5% in the
private sector and just under 10% overall ; but union sections MUST (RFC
2119) be composed of at least two people, per article L2142-1 of french
Labour Law. So there's at least two employees in that section, which is at
least 20% (give or take), way above the national average.

Lastly, I'd like to address your accusations of lying.
It seems to me that the only answer you ever provide to any criticism is
that it's all a lie. In other words, you're quick to slap everyone with
Kellyanne Conway's motto, "fake news", but you lack her talent and, as
she's had dips on it, the element of surprise.
I've faced them before myself, when I tried to explain to the rest of the
members an email YOU sent to discussions@, the non-public mailing list of
Wikimédia France, and its subtext. Specifically, the email I sent on May
6th was rejected, and I was told on May 7th by a representative of the
Board of Trustees (of which you were chairman) it was all a "web of
ravings" ("marasme de spéculations") that was based on former members' side
of the story — former members which, by the way, I hadn't had any
meaningful contact in a few years — ; when in fact, it was solely based on
YOUR version of the story, using basic reasoning skills.
As it turns out, and as a few people can attest, a good amount of what I "
*raved*" in my email turned out to not just be generally true, but rather
accurate as well.
So forgive me to say, but I feel you lack proper footing to decide on who's
lying and who's not.

Really, the whole story is, for lack of a better word, and even though
Donald Trump has already used it, "sad" ; and it would be best for the
former Board of Trustees, if not to apologize to the people involved, to at
least lay low about it.

Happy Thanksgiving dinner to the ones who have it, and happy
nondenominational evening to the ones who don't.

Alphos
Member of WMFr, despite the odds


2017-11-23 20:54 GMT+01:00 Emeric Vallespi <[hidden email]>:

> Sylvain,
>
> I have to answer to your email where you’re especially lying.
> You say that you’re writing on behalf of a union section of the employees
> of Wikimedia France but I’m personally curious to know the weight of this
> union section. My question is actually: who else is represented by your
> email, if not yourself?
>
> Moreover, you’re saying that you received a « warning » (?) because you
> had a girlfriend. Is it serious?
> Your employer asked you to distinguish professional time and personal
> time. Indeed, you were reminded that you had to dedicate your work hours to
> the missions that were devoted to you and not to solve problems related to
> your personal life, especially if it interferes with organization’s
> activities and governance. It is also you who came, on your own, to tell us
> about the complexity of your personal and relationship situation in order
> to benefit of professional arrangements. The direction never looked for,
> nor asked, any information on this subject.
>
> You’re mentioning the cancellation of the letter. Since, to my knowledge,
> no sanction has been filed to your HR record, I do not really see what have
> been canceled.
> I can understand that supporting your new board of trustees, involved in
> the governance issues and in the criminal complaints filed is critical to
> show your loyalty.
>
> Do you know how impatient am I to discover your next fable? I guess the
> only one never mentioned yet is maybe about a murder or something (although
> a streetfight scenario has already been invented x’D).
>
> I think it was important to re-explain all those points so that the
> community, which is - again - unnecessarily taken as witness, is not
> deceived by a scenario built from scratch.
> Again, to discredit the movement by such erroneous but public accusations
> still shows that only personal interests and vainness matter in this
> conflict with some people.
>
> For months, several lies have been told by different people. Because the
> Wikimedia community protect itself and its members by harassing and
> defaming people who question the probity and integrity of some of its
> members doesn’t make of this lies the truth.
>
> Best regards to all of you,
> --
> Emeric Vallespi
>
> > On 22 Nov 2017, at 13:37, Sylvain Boissel <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Katherine,
> >
> > 2017-10-19 23:19 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher <[hidden email]>:
> >
> >> [...]
> >
> >> We are committed to working with the new Wikimédia France conseil
> >> d’administration (governing board) to support the French community as
> they
> >> work to address and resolve these and other outstanding issues. The
> >> Wikimedia Foundation and the new leadership of Wikimédia France are
> already
> >> cooperating to address the governance-related concerns raised by the
> >> volunteer Funds Dissemination Committee in the first half of 2017. As
> part
> >> of this work, we have encouraged them to review how they will
> independently
> >> handle claims of harassment in the future. The Wikimedia Foundation and
> >> Wikimédia France share a common goal: a healthy, welcoming, respectful,
> >> inclusive Wikimedia community in France.
> >>
> >> I know I am not alone in my dismay for how these events have unfolded.
> Many
> >> dedicated, good-faith members of the French community, including current
> >> community members and present and former Wikimédia France board and
> staff
> >> members, have experienced distress and anxiety over recent months. Those
> >> outside of the community have watched with dismay as our peers and
> friends
> >> have found themselves disoriented, distressed, alienated, or at odds
> with
> >> one another. And yet we also know that many in France now feel a renewed
> >> sense of purpose for building the healthy and welcoming community we all
> >> desire.
> >
> > As the representative of the local branch of the labor union
> > ASSO-Solidaires at Wikimédia France, I wanted to thank you and the WMF
> > staff members who took part in the site visit in Paris in July  (namely
> > Katy Love, Winifred Olliff, Stephen Laporte and James Baldwin) for
> hearing
> > the distress of the staff members at a time when Wikimédia France's board
> > plainly refused to discuss with the staff.
> >
> > I also wanted to confirm that things are getting better with the new
> board
> > elected in September.
> >
> > I cannot speak about what my coworkers went through without asking them
> > first, but I can share an example from my own story: in February, I was
> > issued a « rappel à l'ordre » (warning) by the former direction and
> > board, accusing
> > me of disloyalty to the chapter because I had a girlfriend. It was
> > cancelled this month by the new board, and this is a huge relief to me.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Sylvain.
> >
> > --
> > *Sylvain Boissel*
> > Délégué du personnel et Responsable de la section syndicale
> ASSO-Solidaires
> > *WIKIMÉDIA FRANCE*
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

Gabriel Thullen
In reply to this post by metasj
Dear Sylvain,

Thank you for your message and thank you for showing us that our Wikimedia
employees are white collar workers, and as such they also have the right to
be part of an organized labor movement. For those who do not know me well,
I am a board member of the Geneva public sector labor union association (11
different labor unions), so I strongly encourage initiatives like the
French one.

I am also a strong believer in settling disputes through negotiations and
discussions between the different parties involved. A local labor union
branch is a great way to ensure that the employees can voice their
grievances. This whole unfortunate situation might have been avoided if the
employees had been able to express their distress, and if they could have
received the support of a larger labor union used to dealing with this type
of management issues.

Once again, thank you Sylvain for telling us about this. I now hope that
you will all forgive me for preaching about labor unions...

Best regards
Gabe

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:39 PM, Samuel Klein <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Nov 23, 2017 2:55 PM, "Emeric Vallespi" <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> <sniiip>
>
> the Wikimedia community protect itself and its members by harassing and
> defaming people who question
>
>
> I cannot imagine why anyone would attempt to defame you, when they cannot
> hope to surpass the eloquence and thoroughness of your own writing.
>
> —Sam.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

Craig Franklin
In reply to this post by Xavier Combelle-2
Can I suggest to all parties that, as was the case last time this came up
here, raking this conflict over the coals here on a mailing list where very
few of us have direct knowledge of the situation, or the power to do
anything about it in any case, is probably not helpful for anyone?  I am
especially uncomfortable at the notion of the discussion of people's HR
records and personal lives in a public forum such as this.

Cheers,
Craig

On 24 November 2017 at 06:23, Xavier Combelle <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Emeric,
>
> When you say, that no sanction has filed his HR record, you are half or
> completely lying.
> The existence of a "rappel à l'ordre" (warning)
> is an argument which can support fire someone of the staff so it should
> be in a HR record.
>
> In the same way Sylvain never said he is writing his email on behalf of
> an union of the employees of Wikimedia France
> but that he is the representative of the the employees of Wikimedia
> France which is plenty true.
>
> From the whole wikimedia france, movement, during the #wmfrgate, it was
> only you Emeric and the old direction as a whole
> that your declaration don't match the facts or your subsequent
> declaration, as it it happened during the #bandeaugate in summer last year.
>
> I have still to see the said "lies" from your opponent which contradicts
> other public information (apart the words of you and the old direction)
>
> Xavier Combelle
>
> Le 23/11/2017 à 20:54, Emeric Vallespi a écrit :
> > Sylvain,
> >
> > I have to answer to your email where you’re especially lying.
> > You say that you’re writing on behalf of a union section of the
> employees of Wikimedia France but I’m personally curious to know the weight
> of this union section. My question is actually: who else is represented by
> your email, if not yourself?
> >
> > Moreover, you’re saying that you received a « warning » (?) because you
> had a girlfriend. Is it serious?
> > Your employer asked you to distinguish professional time and personal
> time. Indeed, you were reminded that you had to dedicate your work hours to
> the missions that were devoted to you and not to solve problems related to
> your personal life, especially if it interferes with organization’s
> activities and governance. It is also you who came, on your own, to tell us
> about the complexity of your personal and relationship situation in order
> to benefit of professional arrangements. The direction never looked for,
> nor asked, any information on this subject.
> >
> > You’re mentioning the cancellation of the letter. Since, to my
> knowledge, no sanction has been filed to your HR record, I do not really
> see what have been canceled.
> > I can understand that supporting your new board of trustees, involved in
> the governance issues and in the criminal complaints filed is critical to
> show your loyalty.
> >
> > Do you know how impatient am I to discover your next fable? I guess the
> only one never mentioned yet is maybe about a murder or something (although
> a streetfight scenario has already been invented x’D).
> >
> > I think it was important to re-explain all those points so that the
> community, which is - again - unnecessarily taken as witness, is not
> deceived by a scenario built from scratch.
> > Again, to discredit the movement by such erroneous but public
> accusations still shows that only personal interests and vainness matter in
> this conflict with some people.
> >
> > For months, several lies have been told by different people. Because the
> Wikimedia community protect itself and its members by harassing and
> defaming people who question the probity and integrity of some of its
> members doesn’t make of this lies the truth.
> >
> > Best regards to all of you,
> > --
> > Emeric Vallespi
> >
> >> On 22 Nov 2017, at 13:37, Sylvain Boissel <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Katherine,
> >>
> >> 2017-10-19 23:19 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher <[hidden email]>:
> >>
> >>> [...]
> >>> We are committed to working with the new Wikimédia France conseil
> >>> d’administration (governing board) to support the French community as
> they
> >>> work to address and resolve these and other outstanding issues. The
> >>> Wikimedia Foundation and the new leadership of Wikimédia France are
> already
> >>> cooperating to address the governance-related concerns raised by the
> >>> volunteer Funds Dissemination Committee in the first half of 2017. As
> part
> >>> of this work, we have encouraged them to review how they will
> independently
> >>> handle claims of harassment in the future. The Wikimedia Foundation and
> >>> Wikimédia France share a common goal: a healthy, welcoming, respectful,
> >>> inclusive Wikimedia community in France.
> >>>
> >>> I know I am not alone in my dismay for how these events have unfolded.
> Many
> >>> dedicated, good-faith members of the French community, including
> current
> >>> community members and present and former Wikimédia France board and
> staff
> >>> members, have experienced distress and anxiety over recent months.
> Those
> >>> outside of the community have watched with dismay as our peers and
> friends
> >>> have found themselves disoriented, distressed, alienated, or at odds
> with
> >>> one another. And yet we also know that many in France now feel a
> renewed
> >>> sense of purpose for building the healthy and welcoming community we
> all
> >>> desire.
> >> As the representative of the local branch of the labor union
> >> ASSO-Solidaires at Wikimédia France, I wanted to thank you and the WMF
> >> staff members who took part in the site visit in Paris in July  (namely
> >> Katy Love, Winifred Olliff, Stephen Laporte and James Baldwin) for
> hearing
> >> the distress of the staff members at a time when Wikimédia France's
> board
> >> plainly refused to discuss with the staff.
> >>
> >> I also wanted to confirm that things are getting better with the new
> board
> >> elected in September.
> >>
> >> I cannot speak about what my coworkers went through without asking them
> >> first, but I can share an example from my own story: in February, I was
> >> issued a « rappel à l'ordre » (warning) by the former direction and
> >> board, accusing
> >> me of disloyalty to the chapter because I had a girlfriend. It was
> >> cancelled this month by the new board, and this is a huge relief to me.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Sylvain.
> >>
> >> --
> >> *Sylvain Boissel*
> >> Délégué du personnel et Responsable de la section syndicale
> ASSO-Solidaires
> >> *WIKIMÉDIA FRANCE*
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >> New messages to: [hidden email]
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

Emeric Vallespi
One must have the courage of one's words and assume them.
There is a very simple way of knowing who is lying: can Sylvain publish the
letter in question? I will be really interested to see when he was punished
for "having a girlfriend".
Furthermore, I can't agree more with Craig and as I said, what a shame to
expose all of this here publicly. But be sure that when I'll stop to read
false statements or that I'm providing "alternative facts", I won't need
anymore to write here.

Cheers,
--
Emeric Vallespi



2017-11-24 3:34 GMT+01:00 Craig Franklin <[hidden email]>:

> Can I suggest to all parties that, as was the case last time this came up
> here, raking this conflict over the coals here on a mailing list where very
> few of us have direct knowledge of the situation, or the power to do
> anything about it in any case, is probably not helpful for anyone?  I am
> especially uncomfortable at the notion of the discussion of people's HR
> records and personal lives in a public forum such as this.
>
> Cheers,
> Craig
>
> On 24 November 2017 at 06:23, Xavier Combelle <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Emeric,
> >
> > When you say, that no sanction has filed his HR record, you are half or
> > completely lying.
> > The existence of a "rappel à l'ordre" (warning)
> > is an argument which can support fire someone of the staff so it should
> > be in a HR record.
> >
> > In the same way Sylvain never said he is writing his email on behalf of
> > an union of the employees of Wikimedia France
> > but that he is the representative of the the employees of Wikimedia
> > France which is plenty true.
> >
> > From the whole wikimedia france, movement, during the #wmfrgate, it was
> > only you Emeric and the old direction as a whole
> > that your declaration don't match the facts or your subsequent
> > declaration, as it it happened during the #bandeaugate in summer last
> year.
> >
> > I have still to see the said "lies" from your opponent which contradicts
> > other public information (apart the words of you and the old direction)
> >
> > Xavier Combelle
> >
> > Le 23/11/2017 à 20:54, Emeric Vallespi a écrit :
> > > Sylvain,
> > >
> > > I have to answer to your email where you’re especially lying.
> > > You say that you’re writing on behalf of a union section of the
> > employees of Wikimedia France but I’m personally curious to know the
> weight
> > of this union section. My question is actually: who else is represented
> by
> > your email, if not yourself?
> > >
> > > Moreover, you’re saying that you received a « warning » (?) because you
> > had a girlfriend. Is it serious?
> > > Your employer asked you to distinguish professional time and personal
> > time. Indeed, you were reminded that you had to dedicate your work hours
> to
> > the missions that were devoted to you and not to solve problems related
> to
> > your personal life, especially if it interferes with organization’s
> > activities and governance. It is also you who came, on your own, to tell
> us
> > about the complexity of your personal and relationship situation in order
> > to benefit of professional arrangements. The direction never looked for,
> > nor asked, any information on this subject.
> > >
> > > You’re mentioning the cancellation of the letter. Since, to my
> > knowledge, no sanction has been filed to your HR record, I do not really
> > see what have been canceled.
> > > I can understand that supporting your new board of trustees, involved
> in
> > the governance issues and in the criminal complaints filed is critical to
> > show your loyalty.
> > >
> > > Do you know how impatient am I to discover your next fable? I guess the
> > only one never mentioned yet is maybe about a murder or something
> (although
> > a streetfight scenario has already been invented x’D).
> > >
> > > I think it was important to re-explain all those points so that the
> > community, which is - again - unnecessarily taken as witness, is not
> > deceived by a scenario built from scratch.
> > > Again, to discredit the movement by such erroneous but public
> > accusations still shows that only personal interests and vainness matter
> in
> > this conflict with some people.
> > >
> > > For months, several lies have been told by different people. Because
> the
> > Wikimedia community protect itself and its members by harassing and
> > defaming people who question the probity and integrity of some of its
> > members doesn’t make of this lies the truth.
> > >
> > > Best regards to all of you,
> > > --
> > > Emeric Vallespi
> > >
> > >> On 22 Nov 2017, at 13:37, Sylvain Boissel <
> [hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi Katherine,
> > >>
> > >> 2017-10-19 23:19 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher <[hidden email]>:
> > >>
> > >>> [...]
> > >>> We are committed to working with the new Wikimédia France conseil
> > >>> d’administration (governing board) to support the French community as
> > they
> > >>> work to address and resolve these and other outstanding issues. The
> > >>> Wikimedia Foundation and the new leadership of Wikimédia France are
> > already
> > >>> cooperating to address the governance-related concerns raised by the
> > >>> volunteer Funds Dissemination Committee in the first half of 2017. As
> > part
> > >>> of this work, we have encouraged them to review how they will
> > independently
> > >>> handle claims of harassment in the future. The Wikimedia Foundation
> and
> > >>> Wikimédia France share a common goal: a healthy, welcoming,
> respectful,
> > >>> inclusive Wikimedia community in France.
> > >>>
> > >>> I know I am not alone in my dismay for how these events have
> unfolded.
> > Many
> > >>> dedicated, good-faith members of the French community, including
> > current
> > >>> community members and present and former Wikimédia France board and
> > staff
> > >>> members, have experienced distress and anxiety over recent months.
> > Those
> > >>> outside of the community have watched with dismay as our peers and
> > friends
> > >>> have found themselves disoriented, distressed, alienated, or at odds
> > with
> > >>> one another. And yet we also know that many in France now feel a
> > renewed
> > >>> sense of purpose for building the healthy and welcoming community we
> > all
> > >>> desire.
> > >> As the representative of the local branch of the labor union
> > >> ASSO-Solidaires at Wikimédia France, I wanted to thank you and the WMF
> > >> staff members who took part in the site visit in Paris in July
> (namely
> > >> Katy Love, Winifred Olliff, Stephen Laporte and James Baldwin) for
> > hearing
> > >> the distress of the staff members at a time when Wikimédia France's
> > board
> > >> plainly refused to discuss with the staff.
> > >>
> > >> I also wanted to confirm that things are getting better with the new
> > board
> > >> elected in September.
> > >>
> > >> I cannot speak about what my coworkers went through without asking
> them
> > >> first, but I can share an example from my own story: in February, I
> was
> > >> issued a « rappel à l'ordre » (warning) by the former direction and
> > >> board, accusing
> > >> me of disloyalty to the chapter because I had a girlfriend. It was
> > >> cancelled this month by the new board, and this is a huge relief to
> me.
> > >>
> > >> Best regards,
> > >> Sylvain.
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> *Sylvain Boissel*
> > >> Délégué du personnel et Responsable de la section syndicale
> > ASSO-Solidaires
> > >> *WIKIMÉDIA FRANCE*
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > >> New messages to: [hidden email]
> > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Wikimedia-l] Legal status of Wikimeida lists [Was: Re: The other side of the crisis at WMFR]

mathieu lovato stumpf guntz
In reply to this post by Emeric Vallespi
Saluton ĉiuj,

Le 23/11/2017 à 20:54, Emeric Vallespi a écrit :
> I think it was important to re-explain all those points so that the community, which is - again - unnecessarily taken as witness, is not deceived by a scenario built from scratch.
> Again, to discredit the movement by such erroneous but public accusations still shows that only personal interests and vainness matter in this conflict with some people.
>
I seize the opportunity to ask: what is the legal status of the list? Is
it considered public?

I mean, it's easy to subscribe for anyone, but you still have to
subscribe. And as far as I know, accessing archives require to login.
Now there are other website which make crawled archives publicly
accessible, but just because some do that doesn't mean it's legal.

Also I'm not aware of any license regarding posted emails, so plain
copyright probably apply, minus any exception related to epistolary
material that might exist.

It might be interesting to make any post to our mailing list a free
licensed material. I've been thinking about that as I had the idea to
extensively analyse the wikidata-l mailling list and publish a side by
side statements and extracted keywords elements, but from a legal point
of view it is probably not feasible. That might be circumvented with
links, or providing a software which generate the expected table from
provided references, but anyway it's less practical than a straight
published table. Having this material published under a free license
would make it far more useful in any kind of study with such an
extensive goal in its publication.

Now, switching to a free license would not make the change retroactive,
but it would already cover new material. Also it should be possible to
contact most posters through their email and ask permission to release
their previous publications under one or more free licenses and change
archive metadata accordingly.

Legale,
mathieu
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

mathieu lovato stumpf guntz
In reply to this post by metasj
Saluton Samuel kaj ĉiuj,

Le 23/11/2017 à 22:39, Samuel Klein a écrit :
> On Nov 23, 2017 2:55 PM, "Emeric Vallespi" <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> <sniiip>
>
> the Wikimedia community protect itself and its members by harassing and
> defaming people who question
Please don't turn it to a inaccurate "us versus them" representation.
Sure there are people in our community that misbehaves in reaction to a
feeling of aggression. But condemning the whole community for also
including this kind of behaviour is not constructive. We also have
people who try, not vehemently, to listen to each party, bring
compassion, and try to help solving conflicts through dialogue as far as
possible.

Of course our community is not perfect, we are human, and nothing
characterize better human beings than erroneous behaviours. But as far
as I know, we don't promote harassment, or any form of violence, as an
acceptable solution to problems we face.
> I cannot imagine why anyone would attempt to defame you, when they cannot
> hope to surpass the eloquence and thoroughness of your own writing.
Well, they are situation where having more reasonable arguments are not
enough to meet prevalence in decisions. Typically when different
decision can be imposed by force. That may be physical violence,
psychological abuse, hierarchical authoritarian misconduct, and so on.

People are not always reacting with violent means because they are
inherently wired to such a behaviour as first reaction. Often they will
act like that as a last resort because they themselves feel assaulted
and see no other mean to react.

I think it would be healthy to redact pattern/anti-pattern for that kind
of problematic and extensively promote them. Currently we don't have
much material pertaining harassment in our pattern library
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=Harassment&prefix=Learning+patterns%2F&fulltext=Search+the+Pattern+Library&fulltext=Search&searchToken=9ntgdc5ao83rezg4kxhiwx1am>.

Distingeble,
mathieu

>
> —Sam.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Legal status of Wikimeida lists [Was: Re: The other side of the crisis at WMFR]

Vi to
In reply to this post by mathieu lovato stumpf guntz
Archives are public, so, IMHO, the list is.

Vito

2017-11-24 11:11 GMT+01:00 mathieu stumpf guntz <
[hidden email]>:

> Saluton ĉiuj,
>
> Le 23/11/2017 à 20:54, Emeric Vallespi a écrit :
>
>> I think it was important to re-explain all those points so that the
>> community, which is - again - unnecessarily taken as witness, is not
>> deceived by a scenario built from scratch.
>> Again, to discredit the movement by such erroneous but public accusations
>> still shows that only personal interests and vainness matter in this
>> conflict with some people.
>>
>> I seize the opportunity to ask: what is the legal status of the list? Is
> it considered public?
>
> I mean, it's easy to subscribe for anyone, but you still have to
> subscribe. And as far as I know, accessing archives require to login. Now
> there are other website which make crawled archives publicly accessible,
> but just because some do that doesn't mean it's legal.
>
> Also I'm not aware of any license regarding posted emails, so plain
> copyright probably apply, minus any exception related to epistolary
> material that might exist.
>
> It might be interesting to make any post to our mailing list a free
> licensed material. I've been thinking about that as I had the idea to
> extensively analyse the wikidata-l mailling list and publish a side by side
> statements and extracted keywords elements, but from a legal point of view
> it is probably not feasible. That might be circumvented with links, or
> providing a software which generate the expected table from provided
> references, but anyway it's less practical than a straight published table.
> Having this material published under a free license would make it far more
> useful in any kind of study with such an extensive goal in its publication.
>
> Now, switching to a free license would not make the change retroactive,
> but it would already cover new material. Also it should be possible to
> contact most posters through their email and ask permission to release
> their previous publications under one or more free licenses and change
> archive metadata accordingly.
>
> Legale,
> mathieu
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Legal status of Wikimeida lists [Was: Re: The other side of the crisis at WMFR]

Gerard Meijssen-3
Hoi,
You deny the existence of copyright.. It being public does not mean that it
is fair game for any and all purposes.
Thanks,
     GerardM

On 24 November 2017 at 14:39, Vi to <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Archives are public, so, IMHO, the list is.
>
> Vito
>
> 2017-11-24 11:11 GMT+01:00 mathieu stumpf guntz <
> [hidden email]>:
>
> > Saluton ĉiuj,
> >
> > Le 23/11/2017 à 20:54, Emeric Vallespi a écrit :
> >
> >> I think it was important to re-explain all those points so that the
> >> community, which is - again - unnecessarily taken as witness, is not
> >> deceived by a scenario built from scratch.
> >> Again, to discredit the movement by such erroneous but public
> accusations
> >> still shows that only personal interests and vainness matter in this
> >> conflict with some people.
> >>
> >> I seize the opportunity to ask: what is the legal status of the list? Is
> > it considered public?
> >
> > I mean, it's easy to subscribe for anyone, but you still have to
> > subscribe. And as far as I know, accessing archives require to login. Now
> > there are other website which make crawled archives publicly accessible,
> > but just because some do that doesn't mean it's legal.
> >
> > Also I'm not aware of any license regarding posted emails, so plain
> > copyright probably apply, minus any exception related to epistolary
> > material that might exist.
> >
> > It might be interesting to make any post to our mailing list a free
> > licensed material. I've been thinking about that as I had the idea to
> > extensively analyse the wikidata-l mailling list and publish a side by
> side
> > statements and extracted keywords elements, but from a legal point of
> view
> > it is probably not feasible. That might be circumvented with links, or
> > providing a software which generate the expected table from provided
> > references, but anyway it's less practical than a straight published
> table.
> > Having this material published under a free license would make it far
> more
> > useful in any kind of study with such an extensive goal in its
> publication.
> >
> > Now, switching to a free license would not make the change retroactive,
> > but it would already cover new material. Also it should be possible to
> > contact most posters through their email and ask permission to release
> > their previous publications under one or more free licenses and change
> > archive metadata accordingly.
> >
> > Legale,
> > mathieu
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> > i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Legal status of Wikimeida lists [Was: Re: The other side of the crisis at WMFR]

Tim Landscheidt
In reply to this post by mathieu lovato stumpf guntz
mathieu stumpf guntz <[hidden email] > wrote:

>> I think it was important to re-explain all those points so
>> that the community, which is - again - unnecessarily taken
>> as witness, is not deceived by a scenario built from
>> scratch.
>> Again, to discredit the movement by such erroneous but
>> public accusations still shows that only personal
>> interests and vainness matter in this conflict with some
>> people.

> I seize the opportunity to ask: what is the legal status of
> the list? Is it considered public?

> I mean, it's easy to subscribe for anyone, but you still
> have to subscribe. And as far as I know, accessing archives
> require to login. Now there are other website which make
> crawled archives publicly accessible, but just because some
> do that doesn't mean it's legal.

> […]

Accessing the archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/ does not
require logging in (and AFAIR never has), but even if it
did, for all practical (legal) purposes this mailing list is
a public venue, if only because anybody can subscribe to it,
thus not limiting the audience in any meaningful way.

Tim


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Legal status of Wikimeida lists [Was: Re: The other side of the crisis at WMFR]

Vi to
In reply to this post by Gerard Meijssen-3
N00bs are usually taught "public" has nothing to do with copyright ;)

Vito

2017-11-24 15:57 GMT+01:00 Gerard Meijssen <[hidden email]>:

> Hoi,
> You deny the existence of copyright.. It being public does not mean that it
> is fair game for any and all purposes.
> Thanks,
>      GerardM
>
> On 24 November 2017 at 14:39, Vi to <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Archives are public, so, IMHO, the list is.
> >
> > Vito
> >
> > 2017-11-24 11:11 GMT+01:00 mathieu stumpf guntz <
> > [hidden email]>:
> >
> > > Saluton ĉiuj,
> > >
> > > Le 23/11/2017 à 20:54, Emeric Vallespi a écrit :
> > >
> > >> I think it was important to re-explain all those points so that the
> > >> community, which is - again - unnecessarily taken as witness, is not
> > >> deceived by a scenario built from scratch.
> > >> Again, to discredit the movement by such erroneous but public
> > accusations
> > >> still shows that only personal interests and vainness matter in this
> > >> conflict with some people.
> > >>
> > >> I seize the opportunity to ask: what is the legal status of the list?
> Is
> > > it considered public?
> > >
> > > I mean, it's easy to subscribe for anyone, but you still have to
> > > subscribe. And as far as I know, accessing archives require to login.
> Now
> > > there are other website which make crawled archives publicly
> accessible,
> > > but just because some do that doesn't mean it's legal.
> > >
> > > Also I'm not aware of any license regarding posted emails, so plain
> > > copyright probably apply, minus any exception related to epistolary
> > > material that might exist.
> > >
> > > It might be interesting to make any post to our mailing list a free
> > > licensed material. I've been thinking about that as I had the idea to
> > > extensively analyse the wikidata-l mailling list and publish a side by
> > side
> > > statements and extracted keywords elements, but from a legal point of
> > view
> > > it is probably not feasible. That might be circumvented with links, or
> > > providing a software which generate the expected table from provided
> > > references, but anyway it's less practical than a straight published
> > table.
> > > Having this material published under a free license would make it far
> > more
> > > useful in any kind of study with such an extensive goal in its
> > publication.
> > >
> > > Now, switching to a free license would not make the change retroactive,
> > > but it would already cover new material. Also it should be possible to
> > > contact most posters through their email and ask permission to release
> > > their previous publications under one or more free licenses and change
> > > archive metadata accordingly.
> > >
> > > Legale,
> > > mathieu
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> > > i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
12