Wikipedia Sucks!

Flip Flopped wrote:Here's an archived version of a link to the Wikimedia mailing list that Sashi posted over on WikiRev: https://archive.is/gT9Lw. Sounds like the WMF got involved to exacerbate the abuse a WM-France board member was suffering.

badmachine wrote:

Flip Flopped wrote:Here's an archived version of a link to the Wikimedia mailing list that Sashi posted over on WikiRev: https://archive.is/gT9Lw. Sounds like the WMF got involved to exacerbate the abuse a WM-France board member was suffering.

That link doesn't work for me. Do you have a link to WikiRev?

Flip Flopped wrote:

badmachine wrote:

Flip Flopped wrote:Here's an archived version of a link to the Wikimedia mailing list that Sashi posted over on WikiRev: https://archive.is/gT9Lw. Sounds like the WMF got involved to exacerbate the abuse a WM-France board member was suffering.

That link doesn't work for me. Do you have a link to WikiRev?

Here it is: http://wikirev.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=1921#p2761. And here is the Wikimedia-l list message Sashi linked to in that post: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-October/088809.html.

Thanks for letting me know the link doesn't work for you, badmachine.

And here is the Wikimedia-l list message Sashi linked to in that post: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-October/088809.html.

But what happens to Wikimedia France? For weeks bloomed on Twitter the hashtag #WMFrGate , which can be translated as "scandal to Wikimedia France". And this same debate agitates the Bistro , the main forum of discussions of Wikipedia in French.

What is it about ? A crisis in this association whose role is to promote Wikipedia - without being confused with the encyclopedia. Exclusions of members, dismissal of an employee, accusations of nepotism, departures of directors - five in five months - the file is complex.

As a Wikipedian and ex-member of the association, I will try to summarize.

1 In support but distinct from wikipedians

Wikimedia France (WMFr) is an association of 1901, created in 2004 for the "free sharing of knowledge", via Wikimedia projects.

WMFr is part of forty chapters or chapters supporting these projects. These associations are independent of the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF - not to be confused with WMFr in France) which recognizes them.

The latter, created in 2003, is a US non-profit organization. It houses the encyclopedia, the Wikimedia Commons library, etc.

Conversely, many countries do not have a chapter, and contributors are more numerous than members of national associations: more than 4,000 people contribute five times a month to Wikipedia in French, while WMFr has fewer than 300 members.

Thanks to the museums that exhibit on Wikipedia! These associations have no editorial responsibility - they do not control the content - but play a supportive role.

For example, they can forge partnerships, such as the French association with the Beaubourg Center , the Versailles castle, and many museums and cultural institutions .

2 Budget divided by two

Each year, the Fund Dissemination Committee ( FDC ), a committee of wikipedia volunteers of several nationalities, evaluates the funds allocated to the local chapters. The board of directors of the Wikimedia Foundation takes this into account.

In 2014 , the FDC allocates 600,000 euros to Wikimedia France, the total amount requested by the association. However, he commented on WMFr's total financial dependence on the foundation and on the fact that successful projects are the least expensive.

In 2015 , the FDC recommends the allocation of 540,000 euros , ie 90% of the amount requested. The committee appreciates initiatives such as WikiCheese (photos and documentation on cheeses ), but again comments.

In 2016 , the FDC allocates 89% of the amount requested (540,000 euros out of 636,000 euros). He criticizes the effectiveness of the actions, and recommends focusing on a few projects with high impact. The increased reliance on funding for the US foundation is again emphasized.

In May 2017 , the chopper falls: this time, the FDC allocates only half the amount requested, ie 343,000 euros out of 686,000 euros requested (text in English here , in VF there ):
"The potential for significant, net and measurable spin-offs from this year's demand is not sufficient to qualify for funding;
The current governance and organizational structure of WMFr does not seem to be able to pursue and achieve the results sought efficiently. "

The board and the management camp on a line "nothing to blame": in a letter July 11 to the members, the Board awards the former president of the association, Christophe Henner , became in May 2016 president of the American foundation (Emeric Vallespi succeeded him at the head of WMFr), this decrease in staffing, accusing him of settling personal accounts via the FDC:
"For the Board and management, motivations, other than the arguments put forward, explain the decline in the FDC's appropriations this year. We believe that the main reason is the actions of Christophe Henner, former president of WMFr and current president of the foundation, to our chapter, its members, and its employees. "

However, the FDC criticism goes back several years.
An appeal and then a recourse to the Ombudsman of the Foundation did not result in a change in this budgetary decrease.

3 Imputations of nepotism

The allocation committee also raises the question of management:
"The FDC is also concerned about the recent revision of the organizational chart of Wikimedia France, where the nine employees are placed under the authority of a secretary general (deputy executive director), who is the only position reporting directly to the director There is no justification for the need for WMFr to have two executives for such a small number of employees. "

The Executive Director, Nathalie Martin, took office in October 2013. Among the recruitments subsequently, one was criticized by members, that in February 2015 by Cyrille Bertin, consultant in charge of financing and participation.

One participant indicated on the internal discussion list that he was also the director's husband, a link that was not mentioned by the Board.

Nathalie Martin, attached for this article, answers:
"Cyrille was a member of the association at that time, and the members of the board knew it very well, as well as the bond that binds us together, and I never intervened in the recruitment process. (to which I do not have access) and decided to offer him the position. "

Last April , Cyrille Bertin became deputy director. The information is not announced to the members, it is only learned by a modification of the page on the employees.

On July 18, Thierry Coudray, a former member of the association (he was treasurer) and then executive director before Nathalie Martin, published a long open letter to the current president, Samuel Le Goff. He contests the assertion, often repeated by the current Board, that management can not be assisted during recruitment interviews and considers that this system would be desirable: "It has the advantage of avoiding suspicion favoritism or nepotism. "

4 A difficult atmosphere?

One of the five people who resigned from the Board of Directors this year wrote in early July, in an e-mail addressed to several members: "When, in a little more than three years, ten employees and trainees in permanent posts or who were intending to integrate the association permanently been taken to the door, the facts speak for themselves. "

For this article, I discussed with half a dozen ex-employees, ex-trainees and employees, in the association between 2014 and now. All of them insisted on their anonymity, saying they were forced to silence by conventional breaks, non-disclosure clauses or threats of prosecution in the event of public speaking against WMFr. All of them say they have suffered or witnessed harassment or authoritarian practices on the part of the director: mail of excuse ordered, done and redone, and never sent, document "which she has done again ten times to show that 'she is the head', etc.

A member of the Board and a former member both expressed surprise at these accusations, saying that if there had been such problems, the Board would have been informed.

Nathalie Martin totally disagrees with these assertions and responds in particular:
"Why, since my arrival, has there been no litigation before the Labor Court (in four years)? Why was there no question from the staff representatives about this? The register is at your disposal, and there is no mention of it in the team meetings, why was there no report to the labor inspectorate? "

Among the FDC's comments :
"The salaried staff of Wikimedia France has experienced six resignations since the 2015-16 application and, if an explanation has been given, such a level of staff rotation does not question the ability of the association to fulfill its objectives of the year and to exercise the expected influence. "

Nathalie Martin contests this interpretation, considering that the FDC mixes employees and trainees or people in civic service.

Finally, a union section was created at the end of June at WMFr, to which half of the employees have joined. "They want to save their job and say I'm going to jump," says the director.

In the open letter of former director Thierry Coudray, the latter criticizes the Board which speaks of the suffering of the director victim of attacks, and retorts:
"From the suffering to the work in the association there have been and there are still, the testimonies I have heard confirmed it and believe me, my HR experience allows me to differentiate a true suffering from a resentment or a desire for revenge. The important turnover of the association was one of the consequences.

As for the refusal to publicly speak of former employees, Nathalie Martin declares: "These people have asked for a conventional breach, with which one can not go to the litigation. There is no confidentiality clause, and all parties in good conditions."

5 A dismissal made public

A departure has in any case been less discreet. An employee, Jules Xénard, announced a few days ago his dismissal.

I have just been dismissed from @Wikimedia_Fr "for serious misconduct".

- Jules (@ Jules78120) July 8, 2017

He was hired in September 2016 by the association, after a civic service, to ensure the link with the wikipedians.

In charge of a newsletter written by the members and the employees, he was ordered to make several deletions that seemed to him problematic, and discussed them by email with Cyrille Bertin. His persistent refusal forced him to be laid off and then dismissed.

This narrative gives rise to lengthy online discussions and catalyses criticism. In the Bistro, one speaker treats the director of the association as "enlightened despot", while sending sexist pikes to a trustee.

6 Serial Departure of CA

The association is run on a day-to-day basis by its director, who supervises about ten employees and trainees and people in civic service, and has a board of directors (CA), whose members are elected by the members, or sometimes co-opted by the board of directors (this was the case in May of two people, including the academic Louise Merzeau - who died last weekend, she co-directed a collective work on Wikipedia).

This year, the Board recorded an exceptional number of resignations, of which the CDF was concerned :
"Between February and May 2017, four members of the Wikimedia France board of directors elected by the General Assembly resigned, representing almost half of the nine seats. could hinder the recruitment and retention of volunteers as directors. "

The first four resignations were not announced to the members, but one block, and without explanation, by mail on the internal list of discussions.

This massive departure was then justified by the CA for personal reasons against one of the resigned (the complainant denied ), reasons related to the former for another, and without reason for the other two. Then a fifth director resigned, also without explanation, in July.

In an e-mail to members in early July, one of the resignators drew up an acid picture, stigmatizing "a culture of secrecy and a bunkerisation of the CA and the leadership exactly opposite to the values ​​of sharing and community that we claim to promote."

7 Exclusions and threats

Several members of WMFr have reported in recent days that the renewal of their membership had been refused (including one of the five resigners of the Board).

In a letter to members on 11 July, the Board confirmed this. Among the measures it takes:
"Initiation of a procedure to exclude the association from persons who openly, through their libelous remarks, harmed the association and / or were the source of acts of harassment.
Refusal of some applications for membership for the same reasons. "

Among the excluded, Natacha Rault, a native of Paris, is surprised by this: "I never had any aggressive or defamatory remarks. Last year, before the GA, question about funding, I was considered a troller and I received a volley of green wood. "

Marie-Alice Mathis, vice-president of the association, explains: "We try, in good faith, to share the trolls, those involved in harassment, and constructive people. , we are human and we take full face. " Regarding the case of Natacha Rault, she reproaches him for having diffused the hashtag #WMFrGate and the critical chronology (which served for this article, because it makes it possible to find oneself in the dates and the links), "malicious and oriented, while we, the CA, are not able to answer ", as well as being" probably "behind a Twitter account attacking the board.

On the 11th of July, the Board of Directors - the last five members - published a text (not signed by the other two members co-opted in May, not concerned) sent to the members.

He denounces an "act of destabilization and denigration, which not only has no serious or legitimate foundation, but is contrary to the rules and values ​​of the Wikimedia movement."

"Faced with the excesses and lies of these detractors", the CA announces the temporary closure (ten days) of the internal list of discussion and the exclusionary measures. He threatens to prosecute:
"We will very quickly take the necessary legal measures against those who engage in wrongdoing by law against employees or board members so that they cease their actions."

8 The replication foundation

A representative of the Wikimedia Foundation, Resource Manager Katy Love, told the Board the following day, on 12 July, that "many aspects of this e-mail are disturbing and contrary to the values ​​of the Wikimedia movement."

It states:
"We are aware of a number of inaccurate statements included in the e-mail of the board of directors of Wikimedia France, in particular regarding the Foundation's response to certain communications from the board of directors of Wikimedia France.
Pending the governance review, we strongly encourage all those involved to avoid making inaccurate or inflammatory claims. "

In her mail, Katy Love says that "although this may be the first public message seen by some members of the community, it follows several months of discussions, on various committees, on current governance and operations of Wikimedia France. "

Members have called for an extraordinary general meeting without waiting for the next annual general meeting in October or November to elect a new board of directors. The request is made in particular on May 15 during a discussion in chat. The Board refuses.

Applications are also made on the members' internal mailing list. In its letter to the members on 11 July, the Board responded by announcing "a large meeting in Paris at the beginning of the school year".

Signatures of extraordinary GA (AGE) applications have nevertheless continued to arrive, and more than 70 members (the quorum) have signed the petition to this effect. The Board took note of this and agreed that an EGM will be organized. On July 13, the critical chronology of several Wikipedians, "Wikimedia France has 274 members." At that date, 73 members, more than a quarter of the membership, are asking for a general meeting.

A thorny issue: what about excluded members?

Wikipedia: gum shots on the pages of MPs

9 Audit next week

Katy Love, Director of Resources for the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), in his reply to the letter from Wikimedia France, said:
"Three employees of the Wikimedia Foundation will soon be in France to carry out an on-site visit within the framework of the Foundation's grant in order to follow the recommendations of the FDC, in particular to work with Wikimedia France to launch an independent evaluation of their governance and to discuss with the association and the members of the French community their hopes for the future. "

These employees of the WMF will be in Paris several days from July 24. They may also request documents and information beyond this "on-site" period .

The former director Thierry Coudray, for his part, addresses the current president of the association:
"I suggest that you, Samuel, as president of Wikimedia France allow you to allow any former or current employee to be able to testify freely, thus to issue from the confidentiality clause those who signed it and formally commit to this that no current or former employee will be subjected to retaliatory measures as a result of his testimony before the auditors. "

10 Judicial proceedings: "An immense file"

Joined on July 18, Nathalie Martin, executive director of Wikimedia France, responded. She considers that she is an "expiatory victim" and stresses that she "receives daily dumps of insults".
"To my knowledge, the only employee who has not been declared able to return to work by occupational medicine is me."

She told us that she had to take sick leave several times, for more than a month in total, following the harassment that she believes she suffered: "I lost four times in a month - vagal malaise - before witnesses of the association. "

She also points out that two people claiming Wikipedia went to a former employer to ask questions about him.

Nathalie Martin tells us that she filed a complaint with the police station of the 2nd arrondissement of Paris, without specifying the object or persons involved, with "an immense file, and I have documents to attest to everything I say." She adds: "I am very anxious that the justice take the case."

11 "A huge mess": making of

This formula, "a huge mess", I have heard many times during the preparation of this article, on all sides. Former employees and wage-earners on the one hand, who report, but under the seal of anonymity, questionable practices, exhausted administrators - "we no longer sleep", "we are under pressure from all sides" members of the Board - by a flood of reproaches, battles of tweets sometimes pouring into personal attack, insinuations ...

Journalist and contributor to Wikipedia since the end of 2005, until recently I was a member of WMFr (see my letter of departure ). This article was made after exchanges with some 15 people, including ex-employees, ex-trainees and employees of the French association, members and former members of the Board, members and former members of WMFr, and other actors.

There are also two chronologies, one of whose authors includes a former president of the American foundation (and co-founder of WMFr), Florence Devouard, and a former president of Wikimedia France, Pierre-Yves Beaudouin. malicious by the current CA, and this other timeline .

Thierry Noisette

The toxicity (violence, sexism ...) of a part of the community does not allow me to stay at Wikimedia France

SHORT VERSION

Edit: On October 19, I received a formal notice from Nathalie Schmelck, a lawyer for Christophe Henner, telling me to "stop broadcasting" "remarks [...] that could constitute the offense of defamation".
After discussion with this lady, it appeared that, far from requiring the withdrawal of the ticket, could actually be a problem that legal issues on which I was imprecise (the filing of a complaint does not lead ipso facto the opening of legal proceedings, etc.), which do not seem to me to change anything about me (which moreover addresses the question of Christophe Henner only incidentally, in connection with the lack of reaction of the Foundation to the violence) , and so I correct.

Various dissatisfactions and various oppositions have combined in recent months in Wikimedia, resulting in a questioning of its governance by some members. On this occasion, the community showed a behavior that is not the one that suits the democratic functioning of an association.

Pack behavior led to the departure of the Executive Director following a harassment that led her to file a complaint against 12 people. These are in addition to the complaint that it had already made against the former president, Christophe Henner, now president of the Wikimedia Foundation - the international structure. Other Board members have been systematically harassed, again with sometimes unspeakable sexist considerations, resulting in the resignation of almost all of them.

The Wikimedia Foundation, to whom I sent uninterrupted messages from July to October to warn of what was happening, did nothing to oppose this violence, part of which happened on its lists and its sites, nothing done to protect these women. On the contrary, it has stopped questioning the word and actions of the CA, giving legitimacy to those who spread odious rumors and led the violence. His only concern seems to be to avoid the scandal, to silence the victims, and to protect his own president.

In an organization that is struggling to renew its members, who has difficulties in attracting women, and who has been communicating for years, to counter this, on its desire for diversity and inclusivity, this is all the more difficult. problems.

At a time when the world of entertainment is beginning to react and denounce the Weinstein, it is unbearable that the digital world - and the best - continues to put dust under the carpet and to refuse to take responsibility for behavior. unhealthy, dangerous, violent and sexist.

In these circumstances, having lost hope of being heard internally, I leave Wikimedia France, and strongly denounce the irresponsible and toxic behavior of the Wikimedia Foundation.
The Wikipédia trash is available for members to problematic behavior separate from their sexism, violence, aggressiveness, envy, toxicity, stupidity.

LONG VERSION

I decided to leave Wikimedia France - after having worked there for more than eight years, five on the board of directors, three as president, three on the scientific council.

This decision was not easy to make. During these years, I accompanied the development of the association, from a group of some friends to a professional and effective structure of a dozen employees in the service of volunteers and projects.

I remain convinced that Wikipedia is the most important intellectual event of the beginning of the twenty-first century and will continue to contribute to it. I remain convinced that parallel structures are needed to interface with Wikipedia and civil society. Wikimedia France has experienced a real success, by this yardstick, forming numerous and fruitful partnerships, bringing the use of these tools into mentalities, forming, explaining. Between 2007 and the present day, we went from a project attacked by the media, mocked, misunderstood, to a recognized site, used by all, working hand in hand with the most prestigious world cultural institutions.

In recent months, however, serious events have occurred. For a variety of reasons, several groups of members of the association criticized the work of Executive Director Nathalie Martin. Rather than referring to his employer, the Board of Directors, public accusations, often very serious, often defamatory, sometimes sexist and sometimes filthy, were laid in public. Members of the Board who protected him, whether by recognition of his work or by legal obligation (as an employer) were in turn attacked.

Quickly, on social networks, a logic of pack was put in place, harassing the members of the Board, constantly instilling doubt on each action, spreading rumors about their personal life - under pseudonym, or with collective accounts, sometimes created for the occasion. We saw former and influential members of the association denounce imaginary crimes, which the CA was required to justify immediately. A conspiracy spirit presided over a questioning not only of the work of the CA and the employees, but of those of the lawyer and the auditor of the association.

All the operating rules of an association have been undermined by these individuals: labor law, obligations of the employer, protection of employees, role of the CA, certification of accounts, relations with the Wikimedia Foundation, etc. In general, all the structuring work of Wikimedia France, which has been conducted collaboratively by the members, the board of directors and the general director for four years, has been denied.

Among these agitators, some were naive, others were not at all - especially when these slanderous denunciations followed the CA's reframing them, aimed at removing conflicts of interest or questionable professional practices. .

Beyond the individual excesses, this episode mainly raises the question of the role and responsibilities of the Wikimedia Foundation. There are behaviors that can be forgiven by individuals, but that are not acceptable when it comes to institutions or organizations. My departure is thus largely linked to what is happening in the international forum - which is no longer able for me to be the guarantor of the smooth running of the movement's activities.

The fact that the executive director, Nathalie Martin, has filed a complaint against the president of the Wikimedia Foundation, Christophe Henner - the latter having been the employer of this one until 2016 as president of Wikimedia France - would have had to be very cautious.

However, in the spring of 2017, the Foundation led a dangerous game of interference and destabilization of Wikimedia France. When the crisis erupted, during the summer, San Francisco's interlocutors appeared to be more worried about the judicial actions taken by the victims to protect themselves than by the violence of the tormentors.

That's what alarmed Stephen LaPorte, the legal director of the Foundation, when I met him on July 26th. I then sounded the alarm many times: I wrote to Katy Love, Director of Resources; Katerine Maher, Executive Director; Christophe Henner, President; Jimmy Wales, founder and "figure" of Wikipedia for Anglo-Saxons. August 2nd, August 4th, August 8th, August 11th, August 28th, September 3rd, September 4th, etc ... I met Christophe Henner on August 4th. When my complaints started to be too visible, I was sent back (after more than a month) to a specialized sub-office of the Wikimedia Foundation, which, surprisingly, thinks the same as its superiors: they are absolutely sorry, of course ... but will not do anything. Worse, aware that the resignation of most members of the Board could disrupt the association, the Foundation asks Marie-Alice Mathis, one of the harassed women, to remain the transition, and conditions the payment of the grant annual to its actual presence!

The worst thing was that the violence and harassment were well recognized ... but the support for the victims was only vague words of support, and no action. It was almost impossible to get an answer ... unless you spoke in public, fear of scandal seems to be the only motivation for these people to [pretend to] listen to the problems of violence. However, not only is their refusal to act humanly hateful, but it is legally very problematic: the harassment and violence have occurred partly on spaces for which the Foundation is responsible ("Bistro" of Wikipedia, lists of discussions ...) . When one of the Wikimedia France mailing lists was closed to stop the violence, a parallel list, created only for the French, was used, made available by the Foundation!

Let us be clear: if the harassment complaint brought by Ms. Martin against Christophe Henner prevents it and prevents the Foundation from carrying out the inclusive, respectful and welcoming policy it prides itself on, it must be noted and drawn from consequences. The board of directors of the US structure has since reported having conducted an internal investigation and renewed its trust to its president. The latter is obviously presumed innocent, until proven otherwise. But the Foundation's communication can only make us more cautious if it considers as a sufficient guarantee a non-independent investigation ... which has not even sought to hear the complainant and alleged victim.

Platforms are now in the hot seat. They refuse to take responsibility, hiding behind individual behaviors. We see it with Facebook or Twitter. Christophe Henner is very well placed to know these issues since jeuxvideo.com, of which he was recently marketing manager, has experienced problems of sexism and violence perfectly similar to those that concern us, with the same inability to put an end to these behaviors, accompanied by reassuring speech about a will ... that never found a solution in the acts.

It is now necessary for the Wikimedia Foundation to take responsibility and fight against violence and sexism on the sites for which it is responsible. Marketing actions at the margin trying to make believe that the stake is understood and actions undertaken are not enough.

At the community level, only a deep renewal will get you out of the rut. Instead, Wikimedia France is falling back on itself: the new president has already been ... 10 years ago (Wikipedia 16); Florence Devouard, one of the main actresses of the protest movement, was president of the Foundation ... in 2004 - college students who use the Internet today were not born, doctoral students were college students!

Among the new board members, Marin Dubroca-Voisin is on his third attempt to get elected, Charlotte Matoussowsky was already intern in 2012, Willie Robert was already a member of the board in 2011. The community is unable to open and lives now in isolation. It was to avoid this that I left the presidency in 2014 - wanting a renewal ... that never happened: the new people elected to the previous CA were considered illegitimate if they had not been active in the community since 10 years. This is one of the reasons for the violence against Nathalie Martin and Marie-Alice Mathis: they were quickly made to understand, with little courtesy, that they were "not our world". Non-Wikipedian board members are frowned upon, and cooptations to bring out non-habitual profiles (two women recognized in their activities for several years) are almost considered by some to be an unbearable coup d'etat by the Board to appoint friends…

We are thus with a current CA whose several members participated in this violence, others have legitimized and accepted.

Today, the situation of Wikimedia France is and will remain difficult, although the Foundation certainly reopens in the coming months the floodgates of funding, having obtained what she wanted.

This interference in the governance of the association is legally very risky: the conditions laid by the Wikimedia Foundation to Wikimedia France (according to a system supposed to be independent) are so alienating that a court would certainly recognize that Wikimedia France is no longer independent, and is only a sub-entity of the Foundation, and therefore responsible as host of the content of the French-speaking Wikipedia.
The systematic questioning of all procedures and sound governance by the members can lead to the rejection of the "Recognition of public utility", which was almost acquired after a lot of work of structuring and good governance.
The repeated slanderous accusations of mismanagement have - and this is understandable - alienated the actors in charge of the control, audit and certification of WMFr, whose work was ipso facto denied, or even the bad faith advanced, by some people who are now on the board.
Executives who have left the organization, are volunteers (necessarily very partial time), who began to manage the paid team, learning nothing from negative experiences on this subject.
New executives will have to be hired, who will be aware (since this is the way in which the discussions took place during the crisis) that:

* Their salary will be public and subject to criticism from members

* Their work can be publicly criticized at any time on social networks,

* Employees will be able to ignore their instructions by invoking their personal values ​​or the good of the community,

* Board members can at any time disavow their managerial decisions and intervene in their management

* The same people who hired them can publicly ask for their head as soon as it suits them, without going through the procedures of dismissals or conventional break (two of the main agitators, Pierre-Yves Beaudouin and Pierre-Selim Huart have directly and actively participated at the choice of Nathalie Martin as director in 2013, respectively as a member of the recruitment committee, and member of the board of the time)

The past work, carried out in consultation with all the members, of the development strategy of the structure was simply denied and canceled. Not only do we return five years back, but it is very worrying that democratic life has been denied to apply the ideas of the ten or so people who speak the loudest and saturate the lists of their prose.
Three members of the current Board are facing a complaint related to their behavior within the association - maybe five soon, according to the results of the elections at the next General Assembly (which had to be postponed sine die in because of the current disorganization of the association). The CA is considering apologizing to other people who are also involved in a complaint (whose membership / rejection had been refused by the former CA because of their violence). In the event of a conviction, a new crisis is to be expected (except to legitimize violence and harassment).

For years, Wikimedia France has been a place where an ethics of knowledge has developed, having both the means to realize extraordinary projects and the freedom to focus on the real issues, on our deep goals.

I worked there for years, thought I had done good, and left others to deepen my work - to prevent personalities from being identified with a necessarily collective movement.

I take note that the structure is the place of power struggles that have human consequences that I refuse. I take note that a few dozen members, always the same, do everything to stay between them, in an operation that has nothing to do with the real life, the needs of contributors and readers, the French law or simply the minimum courtesy that allows a society to live, to humans to collaborate.

In these circumstances, I resign from its Scientific Council, renounce my membership status and leave the association.

I strongly denounce the behavior of the Wikimedia Foundation, whose actions are the opposite of its marketing speech of inclusiveness and feminism, and which prefers to turn a blind eye to very serious facts rather than risk upsetting its community in him imposing to be open and safe , and excluding individuals with toxic behavior.

Note: Marie-Alice, Vice-President resigned from Wikimedia France, is my wife.
Note bis to the attention of those who would like to bring some of their sexism here too: Elected by the members of the association, Wikipedienne for more than eight years, holder of a double doctorate in neuroscience after passing through the School normal superior (Lyon), perfectly bilingual - among other qualities - yes, Marie-Alice is quite legitimate and, no, a woman who does extraordinary things is not necessarily manipulated by her husband, as we could read it during the episodes narrated above.

Wikipedia sexism Feminism

I decided to leave Wikimedia France - after having worked there for more than eight years, five on the board of directors, three as president, three on the scientific council.

This decision was not easy to make. During these years, I accompanied the development of the association, from a group of some friends to a professional and effective structure of a dozen employees in the service of volunteers and projects.

I remain convinced that Wikipedia is the most important intellectual event of the beginning of the twenty-first century and will continue to contribute to it. I remain convinced that parallel structures are needed to interface with Wikipedia and civil society. Wikimedia France has experienced a real success, by this yardstick, forming numerous and fruitful partnerships, bringing the use of these tools into mentalities, forming, explaining. Between 2007 and the present day, we went from a project attacked by the media, mocked, misunderstood, to a recognized site, used by all, working hand in hand with the most prestigious world cultural institutions.

ericbarbour wrote:Nothing says KICK ME, BECAUSE I AM A GODDAMNED FOOL quite as loudly as Remi babbling this.

I decided to leave Wikimedia France - after having worked there for more than eight years, five on the board of directors, three as president, three on the scientific council.

This decision was not easy to make. During these years, I accompanied the development of the association, from a group of some friends to a professional and effective structure of a dozen employees in the service of volunteers and projects.

I remain convinced that Wikipedia is the most important intellectual event of the beginning of the twenty-first century and will continue to contribute to it. I remain convinced that parallel structures are needed to interface with Wikipedia and civil society. Wikimedia France has experienced a real success, by this yardstick, forming numerous and fruitful partnerships, bringing the use of these tools into mentalities, forming, explaining. Between 2007 and the present day, we went from a project attacked by the media, mocked, misunderstood, to a recognized site, used by all, working hand in hand with the most prestigious world cultural institutions.

Eight years embedded in a Wikimedia chapter and being surrounded by daily displays of stupidity, incompetence, lying, dissembling, back-stabbing, and outright libel, and he still thinks it was a "good idea". Of course, somehow his wife magically became the vice-president of WM France, so we will have to throw "nepotism" on top of the pile.