How much it costs to join is a somewhat lesser issue for me than some
of the other issues (though as one of the great ranks of the part time
workers £12 is a lot more to me now than it was when I was working
full time). Almost everything else I've joined as a Wikimedian has
been free to join, though there was a registration fee for wikimania,
I'm not sure why in principle the UK chapter should be different.
As a fairly active Wikimedian who happens to live in the UK I'm a
potential chapter member, but not entirely sold yet as to why I should
get involved in a geographically focussed chapter when that doesn't
relate to my editing activities.
However I have gone through your form, and got as far as realising
that unusually for a wikimedia project you want to know my real life
identity. Now I understand that I'd have to disclose that if I wanted
to be a check user, Arb or boardmember but I don't see why I should
disclose that to you.
I also am less likely to print out and complete something than I would
be to sign up to something online (aside from the fact that my printer
is currently hors de combat, I do think snail mail is a deterrent to
people who are used to doing stuff online).
Sorry if that comes across as negative, and maybe I'm the only one of
your prospects with those particular issues. But if you want to
increase your membership one way is to ask people like me why they
haven't joined.
Cheers and happy editing.
WereSpielChequers
On 18 February 2010 11:32, Charles Matthews
<charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com> wrote:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
On 17 February 2010 22:15, Charles Matthews
<charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com> wrote:
The logic of soliciting donations is always that
if there is more money,
more can be done. Money doesn't make the world of the WMF go round, but
in the real world money tends to be given to those who show they know
the value of it.
Did you have a point?
It is not obvious to me that a fee cut will affect membership much. I'm
concerned that cutting fees is not actually a "membership drive" that
will increase membership and participation, but a soft option. I'm
concerned if there is unanimity that this move is a good thing.
And I'm also concerned about your continuing rudeness on this list. I
have some experience in club organisation and a national voluntary
organisation, and I've been through the "let's cut membership/people
don't join because of the fee" discussion and its consequences in two
other contexts. I'm pretty busy on a project at the moment, and my
interest in participating as an active member of WMUK is not a given.
If an organisation underprices itself in terms of membership, it affects
expectations (of what it will do for the members, of what the members
can agitate to have happen). There was some talk of hiring admin help,
which is the first step in developing a more solid structure that can
actually fulfil tasks that involve more than a bit of emailing around
and wiki editing. If WMUK needs such support, which I would say was the
case, then dropping the fee is undermining the idea that funds can be
raised that can be hypothecated to having administration and routine
work done. If say 400 hours a year staff work is to be done, on behalf
of things the members would like to see move forward, then this needs to
be funded sensibly, and money should not be waved away. The reciprocal
relationship of members paying into an organisation, and things
happening, is actually healthy.
Charles
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK:
http://uk.wikimedia.org