I think Birgitte has a valid point. Not as much she wants (if I
understand correctly) to "forbid" chapters or so, but she validly
points out that there is in the US less of a *need* for chapters. That
has the logical consequence that individuals will feel less urge to
start one themselves.
I think that chapters should indeed be formed if people feel the urge
to start one. Because if you have to force a chapter into existence,
there is a big question whether it will be actually sustainable. Not
only financially, but maybe more important with respect to volunteer
manpower and enthusiasm.
It might be good to reconsider before starting a chapter what exactly
you expect to add to the current situation. In Europe/Africa/Asia etc
the situation is quite clear: there is a need for local representation
to organize conferences, meetups, communication and exchange of
experiences. There is a need for local representation to the press and
to the rest of the outside world such as like minded organizations.
In the US things are indeed just a bit more complicated. Some of these
tasks are being taken care of perfectly by the WMF, so there will
probably be less people who see a need for a chapter. If there are
people who see such a need, great! Get started, and please, imho don't
wait for the Wikimedia Foundation to approve you, but start *doing*
things, start to show what you can add. Organize meetups, organize
workshops as a group of volunteers, and show why you would make a
great chapter to work with.
It gives you a head start, and it enables you to launch very well once
you get approved and you can get legalized. Because excuse me, but the
Foundation is not really amongst the fastest organizations I know :)
That is not per se a bad thing, but please don't sit back and wait for
approval :)
Best regards,
Lodewijk
2008/5/1, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb@yahoo.com>:
>
>
>
> --- On Thu, 5/1/08, Andrew Whitworth <wknight8111@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Andrew Whitworth <wknight8111@gmail.com>
>
> > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Chapter-selected Board seats - brainstorming
>
> > To: birgitte_sb@yahoo.com, "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>
> > Date: Thursday, May 1, 2008, 12:17 PM
>
> > On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 11:36 AM, Birgitte SB
> > <birgitte_sb@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > I am not saying it is impossible for a US national
> > chapter to exist. But it will not be created through
> > grass-roots self-organization as was the case for other
> > chapters. The WMF looks foolish to sit on their hands and
> > wait for it to form. And WMF is not credible when they
> > collect US tax-deductible money, solicit US press, etc. and
> > then say US Wikimedians have the same opportunity to create
> > a national chapter as everyone else if they want to
> > participate in chapter stuff. The honest options are a)
> > WMF staff organize a US national chapter or b) Chapter
> > committee approves US subnational chapter where there is
> > grass-roots activity.
> >
> > I disagree with this completely. Grass-roots organization
> > is how the
> > US chapter(s) will form, it's the way things are
> > currently
> > progressing. There are grass roots organizations, that
> > I've heard of
> > (which may not be a comprehensive list) starting in many
> > places: New
> > York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Oregon, California,
> > Massachusetts, and
> > other places. Progress has been mostly stagnant in these
> > groups for
> > many reasons, all of which are organizational failures on
> > the part of
> > the WMF/Chapcom.
> >
> > It is my personal estimate that there could be as many as
> > 10 or 12
> > active subnational US chapters operational within a year if
> > all
> > barriers to entry were removed. Of course, there are many
> > logistical
> > issues to work out before those barriers can be removed
> > completely.
> >
>
>
> You misunderstood my message (probably because did a poor job qualifying it). I agree with you that if subnational *chapters* are allowed there will be the grassroots organization for them. I speaking of the grassroots organization of a national *chapter* if subnantional *chapters* are disalowed or required to be subchapters of an existiong national one.
>
>
> Birgitte SB
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Be a better friend, newshound, and
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
understand correctly) to "forbid" chapters or so, but she validly
points out that there is in the US less of a *need* for chapters. That
has the logical consequence that individuals will feel less urge to
start one themselves.
I think that chapters should indeed be formed if people feel the urge
to start one. Because if you have to force a chapter into existence,
there is a big question whether it will be actually sustainable. Not
only financially, but maybe more important with respect to volunteer
manpower and enthusiasm.
It might be good to reconsider before starting a chapter what exactly
you expect to add to the current situation. In Europe/Africa/Asia etc
the situation is quite clear: there is a need for local representation
to organize conferences, meetups, communication and exchange of
experiences. There is a need for local representation to the press and
to the rest of the outside world such as like minded organizations.
In the US things are indeed just a bit more complicated. Some of these
tasks are being taken care of perfectly by the WMF, so there will
probably be less people who see a need for a chapter. If there are
people who see such a need, great! Get started, and please, imho don't
wait for the Wikimedia Foundation to approve you, but start *doing*
things, start to show what you can add. Organize meetups, organize
workshops as a group of volunteers, and show why you would make a
great chapter to work with.
It gives you a head start, and it enables you to launch very well once
you get approved and you can get legalized. Because excuse me, but the
Foundation is not really amongst the fastest organizations I know :)
That is not per se a bad thing, but please don't sit back and wait for
approval :)
Best regards,
Lodewijk
2008/5/1, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb@yahoo.com>:
>
>
>
> --- On Thu, 5/1/08, Andrew Whitworth <wknight8111@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Andrew Whitworth <wknight8111@gmail.com>
>
> > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Chapter-selected Board seats - brainstorming
>
> > To: birgitte_sb@yahoo.com, "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>
> > Date: Thursday, May 1, 2008, 12:17 PM
>
> > On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 11:36 AM, Birgitte SB
> > <birgitte_sb@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > I am not saying it is impossible for a US national
> > chapter to exist. But it will not be created through
> > grass-roots self-organization as was the case for other
> > chapters. The WMF looks foolish to sit on their hands and
> > wait for it to form. And WMF is not credible when they
> > collect US tax-deductible money, solicit US press, etc. and
> > then say US Wikimedians have the same opportunity to create
> > a national chapter as everyone else if they want to
> > participate in chapter stuff. The honest options are a)
> > WMF staff organize a US national chapter or b) Chapter
> > committee approves US subnational chapter where there is
> > grass-roots activity.
> >
> > I disagree with this completely. Grass-roots organization
> > is how the
> > US chapter(s) will form, it's the way things are
> > currently
> > progressing. There are grass roots organizations, that
> > I've heard of
> > (which may not be a comprehensive list) starting in many
> > places: New
> > York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Oregon, California,
> > Massachusetts, and
> > other places. Progress has been mostly stagnant in these
> > groups for
> > many reasons, all of which are organizational failures on
> > the part of
> > the WMF/Chapcom.
> >
> > It is my personal estimate that there could be as many as
> > 10 or 12
> > active subnational US chapters operational within a year if
> > all
> > barriers to entry were removed. Of course, there are many
> > logistical
> > issues to work out before those barriers can be removed
> > completely.
> >
>
>
> You misunderstood my message (probably because did a poor job qualifying it). I agree with you that if subnational *chapters* are allowed there will be the grassroots organization for them. I speaking of the grassroots organization of a national *chapter* if subnantional *chapters* are disalowed or required to be subchapters of an existiong national one.
>
>
> Birgitte SB
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Be a better friend, newshound, and
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l