This page gathers the key strategy and deployment questions for WikiDeal, raised while adapting the policies listed on WikiDeal policies. Status: ongoing, updated as answers evolve.

Key questions on WikiDeal strategy and deployment

Every policy in the Policies namespace is a proposal. The answers to the questions below follow a three-step process:

Initial hypothesis: Théo Bondolfi proposes a first answer, as an initial hypothesis to be discussed.
First validation: the founding steering committee (hosting and incubation phase) discusses each answer and gives a first validation.
Transmission to the community: the answers are transmitted to the community of WikiDealers through a soft transmission. The community organizes itself progressively, choosing by itself the members of its Board of Trustees, its Steering Committee and its other bodies.

Questions therefore carry one of two statuses: open question (no answer proposed yet) or initial hypothesis (a first answer has been proposed and awaits the next steps).

Questions with a first answer (initial hypothesis)

Community roles and bodies

Question: the source policies rely on defined roles (stewards, email response team, functionaries, an Ombuds Commission). Which equivalent roles and bodies should WikiDeal create, and under which names?

Initial hypothesis: for now, the same role names are kept (stewards, functionaries, Ombuds Commission and the others). These names will evolve, because a marketplace of fair contracts will bring realities of its own. This evolution is intended to be carried progressively by the steering committee, notably with people who have experience of the governance of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Legal ownership of the platform

Question: who legally owns the WikiDeal platform?

Initial hypothesis: the Ynternet.org Foundation is the legal owner of the platform. This is reflected in the Universal Code of Conduct.

User groups and partner organizations

Question: should WikiDeal have an equivalent of affiliates or chapters (user groups, partner organizations), and how would they be represented?

Initial hypothesis: yes, and many of them. The WikiDeal community is intended to include numerous user groups and partner organizations. They would follow the same principles as the user groups of the encyclopedic world, with the Deal dimension instead of the Encyclopedia dimension.

Vision

Question: what is the WikiDeal vision statement?

Initial hypothesis: the vision is expressed by the slogan "Fair deals with nice people" and by the founding question "Can users own, run and sustain a global marketplace?".

Contact addresses

Question: what are the official contact addresses?

Initial hypothesis: all official requests go to info@wikideal.net, as reflected in the Access to Nonpublic Personal Data policy. This could evolve over time.

Legal referent

Question: which department or referent of the Ynternet.org Foundation acts as the "Legal department" referred to in the policies (review of exceptions, requests from authorities)?

Initial hypothesis: two legal departments are planned:

The legal department of the Ynternet.org Foundation: general policy, legal opinions, complex cases.
The legal department of the operating entity: day-to-day management, endorsement of contracts, application of the policies through the deployment of contract templates, and defence of the interests of the users before the courts or in the arbitration mechanisms internal to the contracts.

Scope of technical policies

Question: which infrastructure-specific policies (technical spaces code of conduct, API usage guidelines, IP tools, peering) make sense for WikiDeal, and which should be set aside or merged?

Initial hypothesis: WikiDeal is intended to run on its own infrastructure, with many points in common with the source infrastructure. At first sight, all these policies would be kept as they are. One exception is planned for the API guidelines: no takeover of the wiki by third-party bots or APIs. Only one internal AI service, WikiDeal Internal AI, managed by WikiDeal, could modify the wiki. Delegating control of an account through an API would not be allowed.

Anti-corruption framework

Question: the source includes a policy based on a United States law (FCPA). Should a Swiss foundation replace it with Swiss anti-corruption provisions or international standards?

Initial hypothesis: yes. The anti-corruption framework would rely on Swiss anti-corruption provisions and international standards. It would be connected to the Board of Auditors, relying notably on the rules of the State of Geneva, the seat of the Ynternet.org Foundation.

Committees

Question: which committees should be created, and with which charters?

Initial hypothesis: eight committees: Audit, Executive, Governance, Market, Technology, Talent & Culture, Societal Impact and Creativity. The charters of the Audit, Executive and Governance Committees would be taken over as they are. The Market Committee is intended mainly for the user groups. The Technology Committee is intended for artificial intelligence. Market and Technology are closely connected to the observatories: the results of the observatories are intended to be transformed into charters. The charters of the other committees would follow the model of the Governance Committee charter, kept sober and completed over time.

Migration order of referenced documents

Question: which referenced documents (enforcement guidelines, privacy policy, data retention guidelines, office actions policy, legal documentation, resolutions) should be migrated next, in which order, and which should be dropped?

Initial hypothesis: at first sight, all referenced documents are to be migrated. A migration order will be proposed, starting with the adaptation of the list of referenced documents.

Reader introductions

Question: should policy pages carry the standard WikiDeal reader introductions (KidsIntro and ExpertIntro boxes), or remain plain reference texts?

Initial hypothesis: no introduction boxes on the policy pages for now. Instead, each policy page carries a short abstract, "In simple words", which explains in plain language which problem the page answers and which solution it brings.

Terminology

Question: validate "the WikiDeal platform" and "the WikiDeal Sites" as the standard terms replacing the source's "projects" and "sites", for consistency with the future Terms of Use.

Initial hypothesis: for the source's "the projects", the standard term is "the Marketplaces". "The Sites" is not kept: the standard terms are "the Markets" and "the Portals", defined collectively as "the Platform".

Trademark policy

Question: how should the source trademark policy be adapted for WikiDeal?

Initial hypothesis: the trademark policy is under construction.

Legitimate informational use

Question: the source allows "encyclopedic, informational use" of otherwise restricted content. How should legitimate informational use be defined for a contracts platform?

Initial hypothesis: "informational use" remains correct, made more specific: legitimate contractual use, such as the documentation of disputes, contract templates and communication text templates (for example alerts). This is reflected in section 3.3 of the Universal Code of Conduct.

Community governance mechanisms

Question: which concrete WikiDeal mechanisms (internal justice, arbitration) should carry the application of these policies where the source refers to "community governance mechanisms"?

Initial hypothesis: mediation and arbitration: the internal justice mechanisms of the Justice portal and the arbitration internal to the contracts. Mediation can always be requested first, then arbitration.

Open questions

Board and staff policies: should the "Board and staff" policies (conflict of interest, gifts, travel, whistleblower) be adopted as such for the Ynternet.org Foundation, or merged with its existing internal regulations?
Non-migrated pages: confirm the remaining classifications proposed on Non-migrated pages (licensing policy, DMCA, friendly space policy, non-discrimination policy, visual identity guidelines, tool-dependent policies).