[Foundation-l] [Fwd: A chapters-related question]

[Anders Wennersten]

I agree  with you analysis, and that we need to come up with some 
definition of entities not being a chapter but in need of official 
recognition and having some rights being formally regulated .

I would suggest we
1. come up with a name for these types of groups - "Friends of..", 
"Associates of ..." or something like that.
2.  start to look into in how to regulate the relation to these new 
entities and how to control them. Actually I think Mike Godwins proposal 
for a new Chapter agreement, while being overly controlling for a 
chapter, would be appropriate as a start for a contract with these new 
entities. Yearly renewal periods and regular reporting should be OK in 
these cases..

 Anders Wennersten
treasurer Wikimedia Sverige
Member of ChapCom



> Aside from the new chapters, right now the Board of Trustees is looking 
> at what kinds of related groups we want to have relationships with. 
> (What prompts this directly is the case of Wikimedia Brazil, which was 
> approved to become a chapter last year, but whose organizers have since 
> decided they did not want to proceed as a formal entity at this time. 
> However, I want to ask about the general principle, not the specific 
> case.) The basic question is, what can or should we do to encourage 
> grassroots groups that want to support our mission, but may not fit into 
> the chapters framework?
>
> There are various possibilities here. One example is interest groups 
> that aren't tied to geography, the way the chapters are. I always cite 
> the idea of an Association of Blind Wikipedians, who might wish to 
> organize to promote work on accessibility issues. As with the Brazilian 
> situation, informal groups could also fit local conditions better 
> sometimes, or serve as a proto-chapter stage of development. Maybe 
> there's a benefit in having an association with some durability and 
> continuation, but without going to the effort of incorporation and 
> formal agreements on trademarks and such. It could also make sense to 
> have an organization form for a specific project and then disband after 
> it is completed, such as with Wikimania (somebody can correct me if I'm 
> wrong, but I understand the Gdansk team is planning something like this 
> as distinct from Wikimedia Polska).
>
> Anyway, I would like to invite ideas and discussion on this. Is this 
> something we should do? What kinds of models are people interested in? 
> How should we appropriately recognize and work with volunteer-organized 
> groups? And in all of this, how would we make it both distinct from and 
> compatible with the current structure of chapter organizations?
>
> --Michael Snow
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-l mailing list
> Internal-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-l
>
>