 hi hi okay we're live on. YouTube all right great what's going to get started, let me admit a few more folks here alright so hi everyone, thank you for joining today, I am Jackie Kerner and I am the. Oh now we're live what's going to get started, let me admit a few more folks. Do we have sorry I had some echoes going on here my mistake here sorry everyone technical issues. Alright, so hi everyone let's try again I am Jackie Kerner I am the communication specialist for Community resilience and sustainability and we are here to chat with some folks about. All things Community really so Community really in sustainability Maggie we should fix that I can't say that very easily. Alright, so here we have Maggie Dennis who's going to be answering some great Community questions that we had submitted. we're very excited to get started, so let me just jump over and have Maggie introduce herself and say who she is what she does and what she's doing here. And then i'll jump over with some how to's and how we're going to continue so go for it Maggie. Hello, I am Maggie Dennis the Vice President of Community resilience and sustainability i've had more practice saying it than Jackie has. And despite everything I am again nervous until this very minute I wasn't but here we go so i'm really grateful to those of you who join us in person those who submit questions in advance. I really appreciate the opportunity to share with you the work going on my teams at the speaking are in charge of trust and safety human rights dealing with operational crises that come in. In terms of human rights disinformation committee support, including the very important work being done by the movement charter drafting committee. So let's just move straight on into the program so that I can take a breath and gather and get ready to do my best Jackie. Alright, well thanks Maggie and thanks everyone who's joining us in the zoom room, we appreciate you making the time today. To join us live and thanks for everyone who's watching in the future it's wonderful that you've chosen to spend your time. In this way, so let me get right into it so with me in the room there's several staff members. That might be best to have them answer some questions they'll introduce themselves when they get to that point i'm going to. Excuse me i'm going to take questions from YouTube and in the zoom room, so if you want to ask a question, please just use the raise hand feature if you're in the zoom room with us. Or if you want to on YouTube, you can just post your question if you can't find that raise hands feature go ahead and use this little guy the circle with the hand here. So, please go ahead and figure that I know zoom's not the easiest on mobile devices, I hear you, so if you're asking a question and zoom i'll grab that from zoom as well. And we'll get that in the queue some questions Maggie might not be able to answer during the call today, but we're going to go ahead and get the answers to those questions and we'll post those in the notes, so what we will do. is get started in the question queue, we do ask that you all are kind to each other force follow those friendly spaces. policies and the universal code of conduct and please remember if you are a native English speaker or fantastic at your English please slow down because not everyone has the same grasp. of spoken English, so we just want to slow down so we can be as equitable as possible, and let's go ahead and get started Maggie are you ready for this fun. I am let's go alright so first question turkey is apparently having a very divisive election next month and has blocked Wikipedia previously what is the WMF doing to protect our projects will paste that question into the chat as well. Okay, I always like starting with an easy one, so I mentioned that my team's work on disinformation, as well as human rights, both of which I think are touched upon in this answer. Which means that i'm actually going to pass the book and ask some of the other people in the room to answer this question, and I think I will start with young ice felt who is here with us so young if you would introduce yourself and then perhaps talk about. disinformation and then maybe Cameron would like to say a word about human rights. Certainly well i'm young I always see trust and safety at the foundation also work closely with Cameron Maggie of course. So the Turkish election really poses three distinct challenges to our communities, there is the. risk of the geopolitical event itself, which if you're familiar with recent Turkish history can lead to our society unrest as a push a couple of years ago, for example, could tie attempt. But also risks to Wikipedia and on the project as well as the content in that regard. Community on Turkish language Wikipedia closely collaborates with the trust and safety disinformation team in the format that, for example, English language Wikipedia is also through the functionaries already familiar with from US presidential elections and midterm elections. And we're very grateful specifically to the Turkish language Community Stuart, who has been one but not the only key pillar alongside the affiliate and making these conversations happen, and as I understand they're very useful, but there's also an additional angle. Of enabling the Turkish Community to raise concerns in case they do occur so far it has been reasonably quiet when they see problems on English language Wikipedia. Where plugging the media foundation staff in to make sure that concerns that they raise sometimes in their language, not necessarily in English about coverage on English language Wikipedia. Find the right community inbox, so to speak, to make sure that it can be considered by English language Wikipedia functionaries administrators and other appropriate community members and on the human rights angle in particular I defer to come in case he has something to add. Thanks, John. I'm Cameron. I'm the human rights lead at the foundation. So just to add on to what you on has said and you know my apologies my connection is unstable. But to add on to what you on said, in addition to to that, you know there's of course sometimes the potential of online issues, you know, on wiki issues, you know, spilling into offline off wiki problems and the human rights team, you know works with a network of partners that are both, you know regional and international to ensure that our community members have access to resources should anything, you know, escalate. Or be worrisome for them and we all 24 seven to monitor the situation and we have regional expertise team and hopefully all heard that because nobody's moving. I think your audio broke just a little bit but I think it caught up with you so I think we're good Cameron. Great. All right, you look like you're still here moving so right Maggie anything you want to add to close out that question. No, I think that is good. If you have more questions about that kind of thing you're always welcome to email us at ca at wikimedia.org. And yeah, we do the best we can we keep on top of it we also rely on you to help us keep an eye on what's going on. Since our community of volunteers are mighty. So, next question. All right, so the next question we're moving to the movement charter. So the movement charter drafting committee published initial draft chapters of the charter in November 2022. When will the next chapters of the movement charter be published. And what is the community engagement plan around them. So I paste that question into the chat. So this is where my secret superpower of asking other people to answer things is going to become very obvious. So, are you okay with talking risk or we have an MCDC member in the room and if you wouldn't mind taking this one that would be great. Thank you. My name is and clean. I'm user risker. I'm a member of the movement charter drafting committee. So I'll try and hit this one up. The first part of the answer is that we recently published our draft for our ratification chapter, which is under is being picked apart very well and very effectively by the community. And we are getting some fantastic feedback from that. We really appreciate that feedback because it's helping us a lot. We know that it's it's not a perfect system, but we're getting there. We are also going to be publishing just prior to wikimania. Some more chapters. At the same time, we're hoping to have our revised drafts of the first group of chapters available for people. So we'll be able to have not only the on wiki discussions about the next chapters, but also we'll be able to do presentations at wikimania and we'll be able to have discussions about what can be better, both online and in person. Sometimes those in person conversations can really make a big difference. So we know that this will be a very important step for us. The next chapters will be including roles and responsibilities, a lot closer there, the global council hubs, what we mean by that, what we are going to have some specific roles and responsibilities for. And I think Carl might be able to fill in a little bit more here. So I'll defer to him. I'm complete. Thank you so much and this guy. I am Carl, working with the media foundation to support the movement charter crafting so part of the supporting stuff. And in addition to the chapters that Chris mentioned, there is also the decision maker on chapter. So essentially, we are getting really into the heart of the movement charter previously in November, the committee published kind of the foundational chapters of preamble values and principles, but now we get to the real content defining the future roles and responsibilities in our movement, and also looking at the entities, new entities that have been proposed by the movement strategy recommendation and shore equity in the decision making. Like I said, global consulate hubs. So this is really exciting content that is coming. The movement charter crafting committee is currently working hard in polishing the content laying it all out. We will have a privilege to host an in person meeting for the committee beginning of June, where we expect to really look at the contentious points inside the committee and then come to a consent regarding the content. And then, as Risker already said, we are hoping to move into community consultation around Wikimania having things published prior to that end of July, beginning of August, and then using the different platforms around Wikimania to gather input and feedback on these key chapters. So, thank you so much and for covering essentials. And thank you for inviting me to complement. I think they're complete regarding this item. Thank you. Well, the next question is a bit more detail about the MCDC ratification proposal. It's, it's the I'll just go ahead and read the full question in the ratification proposal that was shared by the MCDC in April. It was suggested that every affiliate will have one single vote for affiliate. Many active organizers in the movement are members of multiple user groups. So the suggested method would be giving more weight to those individuals and smaller user groups. And is this something that might be fixed with the ongoing affiliate strategy process prior to the ratification? That's a long question. So if you can, I'll post that here in the chat. I will take this question. Yeah, I'm superseding you completely because I am a member of the subgroup that is looking at ratification. We know that no ratification process that we come up with is going to be perfect. No matter what we do, people are going to be in a position where they have the opportunity to influence the outcome in more than one way. So for example, a person who is a member of a user group and a person who is who also edits the project is going to be able to affect it by through their user group through their personal vote on the project and through their project itself. It's sort of a three, a four layer process for getting these things. Now we know that there has been historically some concern about user groups, and it's one of the reasons why we're asking very specific questions about how we should handle user groups. Most of the chapters have processes for dealing with voting and putting forth a public perception. They tend to be larger groups than the user groups. We know that some user groups are very small and it's very easy to influence that group. Nonetheless, what we'd like to do is hear your thoughts on how we can narrow the way that and to ensure that they check with their entire community about what their position is. We don't want to have a situation where you know the person who receives the email at votes on behalf of the committee without or the user group without even discussing it within the group. That just seems patently unfair to the rest of the user group. So we hope that we can get some suggestions from you we've put up a couple of options in our ratification page. We also like to really hear from other people because we know this is this is probably going to be one of the bigger issues. Now in fairness, there are balancing ways of dealing with some of these. There are four ways that the vote has to be ratified. One is that the vote has to be ratified by community participants across all of our projects. So we need to have a net positive for that. We are also doing our very best to figure out how to gather that information project by project so that when somebody is voting they get to choose which project their individual vote counts for. If they have met the requirements, the basic requirements for voting in that project. So for example, if the requirement is that you've had 200 contributions to a project in the last 18 months, then the number of projects you've had that number of contributions to is what you would get to choose to vote from. We know that this is important because when you create your Wikimedia account, it is created on the project you're at and that's listed as your home wiki forever. So we can't change that that's that's that's a very fundamental basic core part of the media wiki setup so we're not going to suggest that be changed. We're going to say choose your project. And then, you know, if for people who have had the number of contributions but it's across several projects, they get to they'll have it on their make their home project. We also know that there are many projects that are very small. And if people choose to vote from those projects. We need to ensure their privacy as much as possible we don't basically want to point a finger and say there was one person who voted from Elvis Wikipedia, and therefore we're going to. We know exactly how they voted because Elvis Wikipedia voted in favor or voted opposed. That's not fair. That's, that's sort of contrary to basic voting privacy. So we're going to find a way to aggregate those small projects any projects that have fewer than 25 votes, we will aggregate them. We'll note the individual that the there were a number of projects that voted that way, but we're not going to reveal that kind of information. We're going to work at some of the fine points here, and it may mean that some of the things that we are used to seeing like voting dumps may not be possible in order to maintain the privacy of the vote. We're still looking at that I am. I think I have answered the question. I'm complete. Thank you. You have even invited another one, which I will pass over to Jackie to ask you. Yeah, and you're not complete. I'm sorry. There's a question for you in the chat, which I hope you're not sorry. But there's a question. Thank you, Nada for adding this here. Is the charter just a defining document. Or does it have applications and don't feel guilty. This is why we're here. We're here for questions and answers and and is wonderful at answering questions. I'll go for it and thank you very much. That is actually a great question. It is intended more to be a defining document, but it will have real applications because it'll have applications this sense of are having to create these. If we have a global council, which was widely supported in a lot of areas when we were working on the strategy, then what does it look like and what what is it doing is the are the important questions there. And so, yeah, we'll be defining some of that. The real life applications to that are very important. For example, if we say the global council is responsible for determining what new projects are created. What new language projects or what new specialty projects are created. And that has a real application because people are looking for that information. They want that support. How do we get it. They know who to go to. But that's, that's a real life application. I'm not saying that the global council is going to have that in their responsibilities. And obviously there's a lot more to think about when you're adding a new project, not just whether or not we have enough people to edit it or create it or support it. But also whether or not there's a technical support that's going to be available to do that. So, nothing is going to be by itself. I think I have answered that question. I'm complete. Thank you, Anne. And please, of course, get a drink of water. Hydrate yourself after that. So thank you and for for answering those questions and thank you for all your work on the MCDC and it's a great support. So we do have a question to end the MC, MCDC run. So would you like to go ahead, sir. You have asked your question, Joe. I didn't ask if you want to or you can type it and I may Oh, is that me. Yeah. Yeah, but mine is not on the MCDC is on the annual plan. Okay. So yes, thank you for the opportunity. Thank you. Everyone. Nice to see all of you here. This is John speaking from Sao Paulo, Brazil. And I wanted to hear from the team on the perspective of this annual plan. I've seen that community resilience and sustainability is fundamental to this annual plan. It has several topics that are dedicated to the role of the team. And I think a general context would be useful on how the team is approaching this exercise and the commitment that come from this plan but I've also had a specific question. And there is a topic around creating a set of metrics to measure community health that came up as a proposal from this annual plan and I wanted to understand a little bit. What what is being conceived around this topic. I know it's an early stage but I wanted to understand why this was brought up as a priority and what kind of direction is coming from this particular topic. Thank you. Thank you for the question and I have to tell you first I'm likely to disappoint you because I don't know my team is not actually the metrics building team. I will say the metrics around community health though I have been involved in for several years. We, we, we have worked closely with our global data and insights team and we had an embedded person to help us review. What I will say from the general principle is, we put a lot of resources into trying to make sure that the community is a healthy thriving environment, a place where people can come and succeed. But it is difficult when we don't know whether or not we're being successful. And there are some challenges around that that have been long standing through most of my tenure, for example. We, we have tried to do a lot to pull down harassment as a, as an issue of concern for users in our space. How do we know if harassment is being decreased. I will ask you on to speak that just one second but I will say the challenge is when you talk about harassment people become more aware of it, when they become more aware of it, all of a sudden, they see it everywhere. So when people first start to fix a problem, it becomes a lot more visible and might suddenly seem to explode, when in fact we are actually just beginning to wrap our arms around it and take care of it. We also have questions around the sustainability of the movement, whether or not our administrators for instance do we have enough do they have the tools they need do they have the energy they need to do their work. This is true. There's somebody in the room I'm not naming names I saw shakey said no. This is true also of people who do very highly specialized demanding work some of the tools for which have been on the backlog for many years so it's really important for us to wrap our arms around it. And you want to talk a little bit about the community health metrics. Yeah, certainly before I dive into metrics just to reemphasize what Maggie said about tooling. One of the big interesting things I think in this annual plan, and potentially for the first time in really, really, really, really long time several of you probably appreciate this because you and I have been talking about some of those things for a really long time. Is that users with advanced rights for the first time, or ever essentially, are one of the key pillars of the product and technology plan. Now this will not resolve. There are potentially two decades of technical debt and backlog, but I think it's a very meaningful step in the right direction. Where my team certainly is interested in and I invite everybody else to collaborate with pro technology on taking some of these long standing issues. Now on the metrics issue there are potentially two interesting ways to think about this. One is the media foundation as an organization I think is only effectively really well accountable to the communities. If there is clear metrics for its performance and that this metrics is a accessible to the community so we can see what's going on. We also has meaningful input in the ability to help figure out what are meaningful steps and improving set metrics. That's what two way planning something Marianna is consistently talking about alongside cylinders all about for health and safety metrics in particular for I think now the fifth quarter in a row. The Global Data and Insights team has been running quarterly surveys of safety perception on a couple of larger Wikipedia language projects and this has been really insightful in understanding for example how Portuguese language Wikipedia, which has not been often all the rounds but at least a little bit understands its safety perception differently what I mean by safety perception is ask a credible set of users of a local wiki privately so they don't feel like they're under peer pressure when they answer the question whether or not over the last three months they have felt uncomfortable or unsafe contributing to a wiki. This is a really powerful thing I think for communities to check themselves, whether they at large think that as a local wiki they do a good job at governing themselves, but it also, and I think this is where the foundation comes in, can be really powerful in helping to align with the media foundation resources right if the community governs itself very well. According to a credible large number of its members so this is a question for larger wikis in particular. Then I don't think the media foundation should be pouring huge amounts of resources on that particular language version, for example, while other communities who surface problems of this nature by having lower scores. Clearly tell their admin and functionary teams but also the foundation that there's something amiss. There is public reporting on set surveys which I can also link in the chat in the moment. But the other dimension to this I just want to acknowledge is the limitation of the current survey tool that I think is important to update in the new fiscal year, which is currently it only asks users the question. I felt unsafe or uncomfortable. Yes, no, maybe in their local language, but if people say yes, I felt unsafe or uncomfortable or not sure. It currently doesn't offer the user who says so a follow up question, inviting them to share why. If you think about long running problems specifically on large but not new English language would be a larger medium sized communities. It's a really important addition that we need to work towards her because some communities that we have learned last calendar year, for example, to our, I think, widely shared distressed across the foundation the communities have long running structural threats and problems and fears that they don't necessarily feel comfortable talking about either in public to each other. Or for that matter to a media foundations that sometimes quite remote to them. So this may be an additional important channel for early warning. And we've got to work on that together I think that's a metrics question was value add. All right, great. So Maggie, I don't know, do we have a speedy answer to the question in the zoom chat. He's typing, let's take the next question you haven't you and we'll get back to it. Sounds great there is so for everyone watching on YouTube there's a question asked and we needed to consult the appropriate person so that person might be answering very quickly so thank you Mercury. So for the next question we have. This is a tough one Maggie I met but it's it's one that might need to be answered. So the person asks, I have heard the movement strategy and governance team was developed and dissolved with the recent layoffs. Many of them were community points of contact, especially in non English speaking communities. How do you answer people who say this change means the foundation does not consider community important. Well, well, I understand why some people might might feel that way, and I am really sorry for people who do where I'm sitting I do not believe that it is true that the foundation has lessened its commitment to community, or to communities who are non English speaking. What I will say is, we are not actually it's intending to cut support instead what we are trying to do is consolidate the work that is being done in terms of community outreach under one team. So we had some duplication of kind of services around different teams in the departments, we decided to not have one team but with the budget changing as it is and because we think we might have better impact we are putting them all under one team. He's not in the room so I'm like, should I name him is that polite, but basically, they're all going to be under the movement communications team. It is true that we have reduced some of the headcount and in many cases this is because of redundancies in many cases. It's, it's because budget, I mean budget is real, all of us are householders to some extent or the other we all know that just because you can't afford something at a given moment doesn't mean you don't care about it. So I don't want to come out here and say rapport we can't afford anything because that's not true, but there are prioritizations. We're attempting to do an excellent job and an even better job in a new configuration in a new team instead of having multiple teams doing the same work with different approaches. So it is my hope that this will be very successful and that by this time next year we're going to go. What a great idea that was, even though I will personally very much miss some of the people who are departed. I think I've answered that question as well as I can, but the foundation considers community very important. I know because they keep me around and I consider community very important as to all the people who are here with me. Thanks. I do have an answer, we want to get the question that was, oh wait, cattle, would you like a tourist fund as well. Yeah, I just wanted to add to the movement strategy part of the question that is kind of implicit in there and that you didn't cover. So regarding the movement strategy, Wikimedia Foundation continues to be committed to the movement strategy. And one of the steps you are doing now is instead of having an island or separate team we are trying to integrate it to the core of the organization. And at the same time we are committed to follow through the movement charter process provide the adequate support we have built a cross team working group to support the movement charter crafting, and we are working in a similar way regarding the hubs. And that was the point I wanted to add that communities are important for Wikimedia Foundation. And so is movement strategy being now integrated to the core of the organization. I'm complete. Thank you. Thank you, Kotal. That was an important element and you're right I didn't pick up on movement strategy component. There is a bit of a follow up question to this one, excuse me. So trust and safety staff are not made public. The staff and contractors page on foundation page says there are over 20 people from four continents, but it also lists people in movement strategy and governance that I know were laid off. How did the layoffs impact trust and safety. How are you adjusting your work. So I'm going to invite yonder speak in a moment as he oversees that but I will say trust and safety. We did lay off several people to kind of tighten our efficiency and management, and also to redistribute some of our resources. Our trust and safety policy team have done an excellent job with the universal code of conduct getting it to its current state, but the ask for this year is going to be less heavy on the trust and safety policy team so we have for example reduced the size of that team. We are continuing to invest just as heavily in human rights and in operations cases and in disinformation cases we did not shrink any of the resources into that work. The teams, the teams who are remaining will be continuing with the commitments, you know, like the universal code of conduct commitments will continue. It's just not quite the same cadence of work as was required to build a policy and enforcement guideline to set a view for see. John, did I miss anything say anything that you think I said wrong, please feel free to jump in. I think this covers the broad outline and I appreciate the question as well as the sentiment of conveys. What is potentially useful to also contextualize beyond what Maggie said about organizational changes actually goes back to the question that was asked earlier about metrics, which is that the communities needs are also evolving and changing. I think January, for example, brought this home to all of us quite vividly. But there was in the Gulf region, the kind of threat that all of us hope we would never see. And the foundation needs to make adjustments in that regard as well. And it's not only a question of keeping resourcing stable as Maggie said, it's also a question of internal changes to make sure that the foundation is appropriately responsive to what are the most urgent needs of the community, which the foundation has always prioritized trust and safety certainly has will be narrowing focus to some degree in that regard to make sure that for the most important needs of the communities. We are most attuned while keeping the overall range of services, of course, going and also dealing with emerging at its layers of complexity in partnership with legal. If you think about the challenges on the regulatory side, for example, that historically were not so big part of the conversations. So things that will hopefully will get easier. And this speaks to the tooling question we touched upon earlier. Most of you know, a big part of tools trust and safety is using as the same tools or volunteer communities, especially the stewards but also functionaries are relying on and as hopefully the tools get better for our communities by implication they also get better for trust and safety. And also smaller things that hopefully will help on the margins as well. There's a shared interest of trust and safety in the communities like many other issues we work on together as well. Thank you both. And I'm not sure if may you want to jump to Nanor's comment quickly before going back to the terms of use comment here. I have a topic that you want to discuss in this call because we can, but it's a pretty big topic so I don't know she's I see you shaking your head now. So let's go ahead with the terms of use question and that sounds like something that we do need to explore. Thanks Nanor for for expressing your thoughts and your feelings on this I really genuinely appreciate that I'm sure that others do as well, who are doing this work. I want to share what Mr Mercury, who apparently works in legal and is very quick at getting the answers and information has said. Well, to read out the question it was I read something about the right to be forgotten in the annual plan. Does it apply to the contributors who committed something. The answer I got from Jacob Rogers who is a wonderful attorney who works very closely with us on many topics is that right to be forgotten is a case by case thing that it is not specifically intended to apply to users who have done something wrong, although there are many cases where it would. It is protected under most European privacy law users have the right to vanish their accounts, but removing content is likely to be more of a decision that the community members themselves will have to make. And if the community feels like they vanishing a user would in some way harm anti vandalism work or something else then it probably would not apply to that person, but I imagine that this is something that we will need to work out like I said on a case by case basis and I'm sure Jacob will be very thoughtful about this. Thanks for the question and I'm glad I was able to get a response. Yeah, and there's actually appreciation from the audience for Jacob so please pass it along Maggie is always wonderful and always willing to help Jacob I can, I can say certainly is. So thank you for that question live and again I want to just say those of you or who are in the room, please feel free to ask questions and those of you in the YouTube room who are watching on YouTube live please feel free to add your questions. You all made the effort to be here and we would like to hear your questions so I will go to the next question on the list. Thank you so much for that while you are thinking of those amazing questions. So, let's see. Oh, here's another tricky one Maggie so I hope you're ready. All right the terms of use update includes stronger language on undisclosed page editing and child protection issues. Now what. I actually know a good bit of the answer to this but I'm going to ask you on to speak to it anyway. Today seems to be quite a day in that regard. So, it's a very good question. It's a question we need to work out the answer together to as the new months gets going. Like, if you think about the timeline at the end of April the community consultation on the terms of use has wrapped up now it goes to the board. Now for consideration I would expect potentially unanimous ratification. It's I think essential and important to get together and I will host some sessions in that regard comparable to the functionary conversations I have with English language Wikipedia and sometimes other Wikipedia language versions for example, to work out appropriate implementation approaches for both of those questions that work on local Wikis because the communities are an essential part of the terms of use and their enforcement. It's both enshrined in the terms of use, but also of course now our longstanding self governance practice. So, I'm not looking to one side fits all solution, which also for terms of use at editing provisions for example historically was not the case. But together with Jacob has been I think rightfully praised on the previous question. Find solutions that work for local self governance approaches. For communities that are already aware. But I also want to acknowledge that given the shape of the consultation my expectation is there will be some larger communities were not necessarily aware of the substance of some of those changes, for which there will be different conversational approach that will be rolled out in a. I expect in the imitations to go out potentially the second half of the months or a little bit later. Depending what else comes up in terms of emergencies and crises. Thank you and Maggie anything to add to that. Should we go to the next one. Let's keep going I'm aware of the ticking clock and I want to make sure. I think that's a bit human rights related. So the recent anti LGBTQ plus bill in Uganda is really concerning. What steps is the foundation taking to protect its LGBT plus Q plus volunteers. So I'll only question Cameron please. First of all, it's really extremely saddening to see what's happened in Uganda with the bill and I don't know. I don't know if many of you know, just a little bit earlier today, a few hours ago actually the bill passed. I will now go to the president for signature or veto or, you know what might happen. For those of you who don't know, yeah, oh and exactly. I was really hoping that there was going to go a bit of a different way or at least be watered down but it's a, for those of you who don't know the bill imposes very stiff penalties on individuals for up to and including the death penalty for a variety of essentially I think invented reasons such as promoting homosexuality or engaging in aggressive homosexuality and so on. And, of course, as the human rights attorneys and organizations in Uganda have said, you know, essentially it gives the police a carte blanche to you know arrest people or harass people who they believe might be a homosexual. So you can imagine right there already how problematic that can be because it's up to the discretion of individuals and their own biases or prejudices, you know, run the whole gamut. So, yeah, exactly when I, you know, it's anyway it's an extreme tragedy, and it's part of a broader trend that has been occurring across much of the world, whether that's in through formal legislation or, you know, threats with legislation or, you know, people individuals coming together to you know as we've seen the United States to out Catholic gay Catholic priests by using a variety of dating apps to be able to find out who they are. And so it's not just something that's happening, you know, in the global the global south but it's also happening everywhere. So, anyway, to follow up in terms of what the foundation is doing, you know, we, first of all, for the human rights team, you know, we have recently just developed a video that will be airing soon with the community for some basic, you know, digital security and digital hygiene steps that can be taken should situations escalate in a way that makes individuals uncomfortable. We are in contact with individuals and attorneys and human rights organizations in, in this particular case in Sub-Saharan Africa, who are able to provide support and resources. There are some really good groups and some really brave people down there, because of the way the human rights team works, you know, we are a small team, but the foundations, you know, reach and mandate is global. So we work with these local partners who are able to actually support people directly on the ground with, you know, in correspondence with us and connection with us so that we can better serve these individuals and be sure that they get the protection that they need. But we monitoring the situation. And it is something that's troubled all of us quite personally I have friends in Uganda. So it's very, very sad. But anyway, there are people who care, and we have the, you know, hopefully the connections and resources to support individuals there. So I think I'm complete. That seems to be what people say. I will note that we were asked, I don't know, about a month ago, maybe six weeks ago, if we were would be able to provide support in terms of content to queering Wikipedia, which is an event taking place. I think next week in the weekend after I lose track of time. Okay. Is there a link that we can share for people who are interested in learning more Cameron. And one of our staff people beautifully put together some presentation particularly talking about in the African context some of the challenges with queering Wikipedia where you can be potentially killed simply for being gay. Oh and I see your hand up so please. We don't have the registration or schedule ready quite yet but they'll be published in the next day or so I would hope. As Maggie mentioned, as the Wikimedia LGBT plus user group we directly approached Maggie to see if there was some kind of session that community resilience sustainability could contribute and then this is the focus that will be coming up. It's the 14th. I'll go back to Cameron if you can remember when we've scheduled you for. It's the 12th. Yes. Thank you. I just want to sit with this topic for a second and say that this was a very heavy question and very heavy discussion so I want to acknowledge that and appreciate you all being here in present for this discussion and experiencing this throughout and join this dialogue together so acknowledge that and hear that trauma that's likely you're experiencing right now. So I want to point out to Richard in the room you mentioned a question would you like to ask that question live. I was ahead of the queue. So this was with regards to the terms of use change so how much detail would we expect to see from legal either during or after the mediation arbitration clause is designed to help sort of deal with some of the UP organizations methodology gets its first use. I just think it would be really good to aid awareness for more info to be shared at least after the first case concludes. Yon do you feel able to answer this one because otherwise I might have to get back with you and writing after potentially two points. First, I'm not a lawyer. So there may well be a follow up clarification from Jacob subject to assuming the board ratifying the language which I assume will be the case. So my expectation from your operational implementation perspective trust and safety on legal behalf is that it is probably not widely shared information. Certainly while mediation arbitration or other appropriate steps are ongoing, which is very well aligned with existing practices where if you think about legal case support. For example, people may be requiring legal defense fund resources from legal for our work that they have been doing on their communities behalf. My expectation is that the approach to what can be shared with whom and how widely, which is usually a question that involves NDA signing arbitration committees and functionaries. So stewards quite often or community at large probably depends on the nature of the case. But I think it makes a meaningful distinct difference. If you're looking at cases like those that have been posing challenges to the French language community in a French domestic context, for example. Or if you are thinking about challenges related to undisclosed paid editing in much less stable regions of the world, say in South Asia or other parts, where they have also been organized activities that may not necessarily be commercial in nature, but all bites they go through paid contracts, but I'm often more maligned nature. So my expectation is that legal, of course, always trying to be as transparent as possible, both as a matter of the transparency value, as well as in transparency being the best way of facilitating the self governance of our communities will make an individual a case risk assessment on the first but also instances after that. Jacob, as I said, made disagree in writing down the road. He might but you probably want while you were talking and thank you very much, John. I also pinged Jacob. He is a real lawyer despite his ability to respond very quickly, and his response to the question is, if we get info will share it, we might not get it though. There is a commitment if he knows it will be shared. Right, I have noted Jacob's magical abilities in the notes. So thank you Jacob again. So here's next question unless anyone has any in the chat please feel free we're winding down the questions so now is your time. So Maggie here's a question. And Sage I will read what you just posted in a moment so thank you for posting that. So Maggie here's a pre submitted question. I understand why the foundation doesn't discuss active human rights cases. My question is about your approach. What does the foundation do when it finds out that a community member has been jailed for editing. How is that different from a terrorist threat or a purse on a person or on the page of an article about a school or government building. Okay, I'm going to start this and then ask Cameron again to support the first thing I will say that we did was hire Cameron, who brought with us a great background in human rights work and intervention and a great deal of knowledge on this subject. I want to note that we are talking here about two different work streams. So when it comes to like threats on schools or government buildings we have a long established work stream for dealing with emergencies, which are threats of violence, and self harm, where yawns team is on call 24 seven 24 hours a day seven days a week there is someone monitoring this inbox and when this sort of material comes in. We have a very clear escalation protocol, where we passed it on to the authorities who are able to handle it. The foundation can't do a thing about terrorism threats against government buildings. What we can do is pass it to people who can. So, when it comes to when it comes to threats to our community members we have a more long term kind of nuanced approach, although in some ways the answer is still the foundation in itself can't do anything. But perhaps Cameron you can talk about what we can do. Thanks Maggie and thanks for this you know really thoughtful and caring question. It's really nice for me to see how much you know how many questions there are that where individuals are actually really quite concerned about the safety and security of the community. So as as I alluded to earlier when discussing the really unfortunate situation in Uganda and in other places as well. The foundation the human rights team in the foundation we work with a lot of local partners around the world and every human rights case is quite different I've been working in human rights since 2009. So I know a lot of people around the world and many different regions who are able to actually able to an interested in providing support for us to support the mission and to support the community members. So when a community member for example has been jailed for editing. One of the questions we would ask is you know, is there other political activism that's been going on. For example, is it, you know, what type of editing were they doing who reported them, you know, every case is really quite different. And so I can't give you necessarily, you know, one type of answer for that. But what we do broadly speaking, you know, is conducting investigation in partnership with individuals and trust and safety and other people across the foundation who may be connected to the community members or work have worked with the individuals or the community members who had risk. We also reach out to other partners that are in the area or in the region who may have been working with individuals. Oftentimes we have community members who are quite already political activists are active on other aspects of human rights who are known to, you know, various organizations out there. And then we go, then we go from there, we assess the case we work with partners and then we build an action plan. And when it comes to, you know, for example, terrorist threats, you know, we consider them to be. Excuse me, we consider them to be a state or non state actors, you know, are treated the same. So in the interest of time, hopefully that has given you a quick enough answer for the question. And if there's follow up, we are delighted to give more detail, you can send an email, especially in the few days after one of these because we don't always have time to sit down and write answers to questions, even though I wish I did. But in the days immediately after this, if you have follow up, please send an email and we will just include it. We're here to build understanding. Yeah, and I will add, I'll add the email into the chat in just a moment where you can reach out. So Sage, do you want to ask your question live and it wasn't me and he's you I think it's phrased well like a Wikipedia and so Sage I believe you're muted. Thanks. My question is, how do we get better when it comes to giving new users a sense that they know what to do when they run into trouble. I've observed over the years that they're usually completely bewildered. And like I understand the reasons for that because we have community processes for dealing with different kinds of problems and they vary. You know, it's all sort of ad hoc, but the lack of a obvious user experience for what to do when you're running into trouble, I think contributes to some of the reputation that we have occasionally as a toxic community. So, if you have sort of longer strategic thoughts on how we can get through this, I would love to hear where you're thinking is. What do I, and I know there are other people in this room with you might been discussing very similar issues very recently I won't name any names you know who you are. It is a big problem how do we welcome new contributors into the movement when, when we can't help them and we, in some cases, it's hard to even properly warn them what they might encounter. I've put a lot of my faith in the community and building the universal code of conduct, the new enforcement guidelines I'm really excited about the future you foresee. I know it's not going to be an immediate fix, we should be able to fix these problems more quickly but the simple truth is we can't. And I know I'm also running over so if I get shut off please excuse me. In my time as a Wikimedia and even before I came to the foundation I watched my community the English Wikipedia struggle with this question. Many of you may remember we used to have an etiquette notice board, it was shut down because it was viewed as not useful at the time it was shut down there was a commitment to do something different. We never did anything different. We had a request for comment process for user behavior, it was shut down because it wasn't particularly useful. We made a commitment that we would find something different. We never found anything different. So these are problems we've grappled with is a movement for many years that I wish we had a faster, better solution but the only thing that I can see is we are building up understanding across the movement about what reasonable expectation should be. And we are building processes for dealing with it when those reasonable expectations are met. So Jan may be able to speak to a term that some of you have never heard before and probably legal would scream at me even mentioning, but they're not here even though Jacob is very responsive. The big red button, which is something we've been talking about trying to think about trying to work on for many years, even though I have a feeling no big red button is going to manifest in the next year or so on account of it hasn't yet but maybe differently. So Jan, would you speak to that? It may actually, but not on larger weeks, I suspect. So the community actually also thought about this problem for a long time, not only in Maggie's context but also in the part of movement strategy. And in the movement strategy recommendation on safety and inclusion, I think Carol, that's the title, it's actually partially addressed. It's not a silver bullet. But it does talk about one of the key problems that new users have, which is lack of familiarity with what processes are available and how to get there and then how to write a good report about the problem that they have experienced. The foundation informed by community consultations that was done even before movement strategy in 2019 calls it's a private incident reporting system. On Meta, there's a whole project team. And you know, a roadmap and all the things available. Madelina Anna is guiding work on that. And I think there are a couple of pilot communities that are providing initial input that will be able to potentially see a minimum viable product life and in operation by the end of the 23 24 fiscal year. I understand that the project also acknowledges something else that comes out of movement strategy, which is that cause communities self govern. It will not be one solution is basically exactly the same pathways for all the communities because of German language Wikipedia, for example, has a very different education approach and also different pages to educate. Then say, Portuguese language Wikipedia. So there will be an extension that on media wiki that will help address this big barrier on new users have, but it will be customizable to some degree right media wiki imposes meaningful limits right here, so that communities can say well you know in our context here really the destinations these kinds of concerns should go to. And the extension should also help to enable users who are not only new but sometimes also meaningful distress, have an easy lightweight way of writing good reports that administrators and other users of good faith actually find useful and understand what the problem is and then help address it. So it will help itself alongside the use. So see that Maggie has I think covered very well tackles this thing from a community practices, as well as from a technical point of view, and will not get us over the line in all cases as a global ecosystem of communities, but I think it will make an incredible change the communities can then build upon on the local level. In the meantime, and I again I know we're over time but in the meantime, I think it is important that we do everything we can to make sure that our newcomers do understand the challenges and for those of you have to drop out I completely think where we've been asked by some administrator groups and arbitration committees to discourage people registering under their own names, for example, because there are unforeseeable fallouts from some of that. I am one of my previous hours or another session we had a user who lived in a country where they felt relatively free and safe and woke up one day to find it invaded, and they were no longer free and safe, and all of a sudden being known for who they were could put them in physical danger. There's a lot of things we need to think about as a movement about how we build safely for the next generation of weak comedians. And, and it involves informed consent. I mean, nobody should come into this movement facing things that they don't understand where they are not given support to understand what they're committing to the work we do is really really critically important here, building knowledge for the world is critically more important than ever. And I think that it's going to be important that we work together to make sure that we, we make this as safe as we can. I'm so glad you asked that question sage. As I said there's there's at least one other person in this room who's been thinking a lot about how to keep newcomers safe from exactly this kind of thing. In addition to staff. Just hear the handful of perspectives there screen. Yeah. Sage I think you have a brilliant perspective on this as well because you work with a lot of newcomers on a regular basis. So thank you for bringing that question forward for sure. And I know as a newcomer, I felt it. It's definitely a challenge in some aspects. So I appreciate you bringing that question. So we are over time friends. So, thank you for all for coming. I mean the conversation went we had so much to talk about this was a was a wonderful conversation so thank you everyone who submitted questions ahead of time. And like Maggie said, I will paste the email in here because I did forget to do that so let me type that in for anyone who would like to ask any questions. I think that we did not answer or if something when you're eating dinner later or when you wake up in the morning and you have a question that you think you should have asked. Please go ahead and write to us and I will keep an eye on this email address for the next few days and I will capture any questions that anyone would like to have answered and we'll publish them in the notes so thank you all for joining. I'll see you in the future if that's what you're doing and see you all soon.