On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:02 PM, Galileo Vidoni galio2k@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Theo10011 de10011@gmail.com wrote:
I believe we are conflating two separate issues here. The example of WM iraq and a Kurdish entity doesn't take into account the geo-political situation surrounding ethnic groups in Iraq, a similar situation might exist in Ethnic Serbian or even Catalan entity to a variable degree. Either way, supporting one over the other would be making a stance that I agree no one in the group would be willing to take.
So, the question becomes about fundraising, how one sub-national organization can share funding from a national one. The solution suggested earlier is giving an option for sub-national entities to opt-in to the national fundraiser. Although this might seem like a simple solution, it would bring a lot of issues associated with it. Chapters and national entities would not like to receive funding with strings attached to it, the sub-national entities might not have a good relation with the chapter and would be placed directly under them in this hierarchy. There are a lot of geo-political, social, legal issues with the sub-national entities. An alternative solution would be using the foundation to bridge this gap as an outside, completely unaffiliated entity for some of the sensitive issues.
Theo
Yes, I agree that the issue is a very sensitive one. It's precisely because of that that the "partner organizations" idea has developed. We should provide these groups who for one reason or another don't want to integrate into a national/state-level organization with an alternative that enables them to be recognized as an independent entity, and yet not a "national" chapter, because we are not here to contravene the UN. We shouldn't attempt to solve Spain's internal problems and we cannot declare Catalonia the 193rd member state of the United Nations*, but we can offer "Catalan-minded people" an alternative so that they can focus on what they want and do not clash with the Spanish national chapter --because they are a different type of organization, not chapter nor national.
Organizations who are not representing a state can't sign fundraising agreements with WMF by themselves, and attempting to do so would be not only a legal mess but a *serious* problem with Wikimedia chapters. Offering these organizations the possibility to establish funding agreements with chapters would enable them to have a source of money they otherwise simply wouldn't have. They are not obliged to do so, but I guess they'll prefer such kind of agreements --Gomà has even written one. If it is the chapter who refuses to cooperate with relevant partners and there are no real reasons for such an attitude the chapter would be going against its role and the ChapCom could ultimately evaluate the situation.
Regarding WMF grants to partner organizations... Yes, but don't forget that we have another trouble spot here. What if a partner organization and a chapter request similar, if not overlapping, grants? What if it is that chapter who is best suited to fund the partner organization's project and not WMF? What if a chapter has some objection to do? We should discuss this further in Berlin.
Best, galio
- I know it's obvious, but have in mind that WMES has Catalan and
Catalan-speaking members and has organized events in Barcelona, i.e. it already overlaps with the proposal for a independent Catalan entity. I say this to insist in that we should consider that many "partner organizations" will be politically motivated efforts and we can't do very much to prevent it, but we can try to channel that into something that is ultimately productive in light of our goals as a movement.
Thanks Galileo.
This is probably something to consider for later but my impression is there is a whole spectrum of partner organizations in the movement. Having a single heading might not be ideal for later, this issue probably might be re-visited later on considering it would govern what kind of rights and authorization an organization might have. For example, grouping cultural groups, sub-national chapters and other such organization in a single heading doesn't give a lot of room to maneuver.
I have proposed a Tier system for all organizations in the movement, National chapters occupying the first tier and sub-national chapters the second and so on. We can assign different levels of authorization each tier entity would have, from trademark use to fundraising, most of it could be governed by the Tier system.
As I said earlier, this probably might fall out of the scope of this discussion, and since we're pressed for time, maybe it could be re-considered at a later juncture.
Theo
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 9:29 PM, Theo10011 de10011@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:02 PM, Galileo Vidoni galio2k@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Theo10011 de10011@gmail.com wrote:
I believe we are conflating two separate issues here. The example of WM iraq and a Kurdish entity doesn't take into account the geo-political situation surrounding ethnic groups in Iraq, a similar situation might exist in Ethnic Serbian or even Catalan entity to a variable degree. Either way, supporting one over the other would be making a stance that I agree no one in the group would be willing to take.
So, the question becomes about fundraising, how one sub-national organization can share funding from a national one. The solution suggested earlier is giving an option for sub-national entities to opt-in to the national fundraiser. Although this might seem like a simple solution, it would bring a lot of issues associated with it. Chapters and national entities would not like to receive funding with strings attached to it, the sub-national entities might not have a good relation with the chapter and would be placed directly under them in this hierarchy. There are a lot of geo-political, social, legal issues with the sub-national entities. An alternative solution would be using the foundation to bridge this gap as an outside, completely unaffiliated entity for some of the sensitive issues.
Theo
Yes, I agree that the issue is a very sensitive one. It's precisely because of that that the "partner organizations" idea has developed. We should provide these groups who for one reason or another don't want to integrate into a national/state-level organization with an alternative that enables them to be recognized as an independent entity, and yet not a "national" chapter, because we are not here to contravene the UN. We shouldn't attempt to solve Spain's internal problems and we cannot declare Catalonia the 193rd member state of the United Nations*, but we can offer "Catalan-minded people" an alternative so that they can focus on what they want and do not clash with the Spanish national chapter --because they are a different type of organization, not chapter nor national.
Organizations who are not representing a state can't sign fundraising agreements with WMF by themselves, and attempting to do so would be not only a legal mess but a *serious* problem with Wikimedia chapters. Offering these organizations the possibility to establish funding agreements with chapters would enable them to have a source of money they otherwise simply wouldn't have. They are not obliged to do so, but I guess they'll prefer such kind of agreements --Gomà has even written one. If it is the chapter who refuses to cooperate with relevant partners and there are no real reasons for such an attitude the chapter would be going against its role and the ChapCom could ultimately evaluate the situation.
Regarding WMF grants to partner organizations... Yes, but don't forget that we have another trouble spot here. What if a partner organization and a chapter request similar, if not overlapping, grants? What if it is that chapter who is best suited to fund the partner organization's project and not WMF? What if a chapter has some objection to do? We should discuss this further in Berlin.
Best, galio
- I know it's obvious, but have in mind that WMES has Catalan and
Catalan-speaking members and has organized events in Barcelona, i.e. it already overlaps with the proposal for a independent Catalan entity. I say this to insist in that we should consider that many "partner organizations" will be politically motivated efforts and we can't do very much to prevent it, but we can try to channel that into something that is ultimately productive in light of our goals as a movement.
Thanks Galileo.
This is probably something to consider for later but my impression is there is a whole spectrum of partner organizations in the movement. Having a single heading might not be ideal for later, this issue probably might be re-visited later on considering it would govern what kind of rights and authorization an organization might have. For example, grouping cultural groups, sub-national chapters and other such organization in a single heading doesn't give a lot of room to maneuver.
I have proposed a Tier system for all organizations in the movement, National chapters occupying the first tier and sub-national chapters the second and so on. We can assign different levels of authorization each tier entity would have, from trademark use to fundraising, most of it could be governed by the Tier system.
As I said earlier, this probably might fall out of the scope of this discussion, and since we're pressed for time, maybe it could be re-considered at a later juncture.
Theo
Thanks for your input :). The proposal about having an official tier system is really interesting, BTW, and maybe a good solution to the horizontality vs. hierarchy discussion.
I'll insist with some points about the Frankfurt notes because I know this is by nature a twisted topic where every word matters.
Subnational chapters wouldn't be grouped with cultural organizations, only the latter would be considered Wikimedia partners. Subnational chapters, according to what we discussed in Frankfurt, are a specific type of chapter that can develop in a country/territory where there is for the moment no national chapter.
Imagine, for instance, that WMES didn't exist and a group formed a subnational chapter corresponding to the Generalitat de Catalunya (Catalan autonomous community within the Spanish state). That would have been OK, as WM-NYC is. If the national chapter precedes the effort to establish a subnational one, then we would call it a section of the corresponding chapter --and it would be an internal matter of the said national chapter.
The problem here is that the proposal for a Catalan "chapter" has always expected some sort of representativity/jurisdiction over any place where Catalan is spoken: south of France, the Generalitat de Catalunya, the Generalitat Valenciana (that's another autonomous community, that Catalan separatists consider part of Catalonia, a notion that Valencian regionalists reject), the Balearic Islands, an isolate city in Italy and so on. On the other hand, their declared goal is to promote Catalan-speaking contents and WM projects, unlike a national chapter is supposed to do. Because of these two substantial differences they could never be considered a proposal for a subnational chapter. What's more, the people behind the WMCAT proposal don't consider Catalonia to be part of Spain.
These people have a clear political goal and identity, BUT most of them are active Wikimedians and they do plenty of outreach, GLAM, PR and other activities (as long as it is in Catalan or regarding Catalan Wikipedia) that I think are frankly positive. Can we offer them a national/subnational chapter going (potentially) against Spanish law, against the Spanish chapter (who does have Catalan members, I insist, though not of the separatist side) and the state of the art in international relations? I think not. But we can look for another type of entity, without the universal goals and territorial representation that chapters embody, that can provide these people with a good amount of tools to pursue the positive side of their activism.
"Want to promote everything Catalan? Look, we can consider you a partner organization for the promotion of Catalan! That doesn't mean you are the exclusive representative of the Catalan soul and spirit, though --you are there to promote Catalan culture, the Spanish chapter is there to promote all of Wikimedia projects in all of the Spanish state and to interact with Spanish public and private institutions, which of course include the Catalan ones. The movement is expecting WMF, Wikimedia Spain and any other directly related chapter to support you and to help funding your projects."
In fact, there can be groups who just look for a structure to promote an international minority language and who would need the Wikimedia movement to provide them, for the most part, with project grants and some possibility to use the trademarks. Their proposal doesn't follow a national/state/territorial criterion nor has to do with promoting all of the Wikimedia projects in that territory or with supporting the Wikimedia community within that territory, because there is no such territory. If we are to talk about territory, we must stick to recognized national and subnational state boundaries. Otherwise we would be playing high politics and we would be creating far greater problems that those we are trying to solve.
So, to sum it up, I'd say that what we discussed in Frankfurt about partner organizations would be what you call cultural groups --having in mind, of course, that what the Catalans indeed are, at least looking at their public side, is a cultural group. Subnational chapters are, as I see it, a different thing.
Best, galio
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 6:52 AM, Galileo Vidoni galio2k@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 9:29 PM, Theo10011 de10011@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:02 PM, Galileo Vidoni galio2k@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Theo10011 de10011@gmail.com wrote:
I believe we are conflating two separate issues here. The example of WM iraq and a Kurdish entity doesn't take into account the geo-political situation surrounding ethnic groups in Iraq, a similar situation might exist in Ethnic Serbian or even Catalan entity to a variable degree. Either way, supporting one over the other would be making a stance that I agree no one in the group would be willing to take.
So, the question becomes about fundraising, how one sub-national organization can share funding from a national one. The solution suggested earlier is giving an option for sub-national entities to opt-in to the national fundraiser. Although this might seem like a simple solution, it would bring a lot of issues associated with it. Chapters and national entities would not like to receive funding with strings attached to it, the sub-national entities might not have a good relation with the chapter and would be placed directly under them in this hierarchy. There are a lot of geo-political, social, legal issues with the sub-national entities. An alternative solution would be using the foundation to bridge this gap as an outside, completely unaffiliated entity for some of the sensitive issues.
Theo
Yes, I agree that the issue is a very sensitive one. It's precisely because of that that the "partner organizations" idea has developed. We should provide these groups who for one reason or another don't want to integrate into a national/state-level organization with an alternative that enables them to be recognized as an independent entity, and yet not a "national" chapter, because we are not here to contravene the UN. We shouldn't attempt to solve Spain's internal problems and we cannot declare Catalonia the 193rd member state of the United Nations*, but we can offer "Catalan-minded people" an alternative so that they can focus on what they want and do not clash with the Spanish national chapter --because they are a different type of organization, not chapter nor national.
Organizations who are not representing a state can't sign fundraising agreements with WMF by themselves, and attempting to do so would be not only a legal mess but a *serious* problem with Wikimedia chapters. Offering these organizations the possibility to establish funding agreements with chapters would enable them to have a source of money they otherwise simply wouldn't have. They are not obliged to do so, but I guess they'll prefer such kind of agreements --Gomà has even written one. If it is the chapter who refuses to cooperate with relevant partners and there are no real reasons for such an attitude the chapter would be going against its role and the ChapCom could ultimately evaluate the situation.
Regarding WMF grants to partner organizations... Yes, but don't forget that we have another trouble spot here. What if a partner organization and a chapter request similar, if not overlapping, grants? What if it is that chapter who is best suited to fund the partner organization's project and not WMF? What if a chapter has some objection to do? We should discuss this further in Berlin.
Best, galio
- I know it's obvious, but have in mind that WMES has Catalan and
Catalan-speaking members and has organized events in Barcelona, i.e. it already overlaps with the proposal for a independent Catalan entity. I say this to insist in that we should consider that many "partner organizations" will be politically motivated efforts and we can't do very much to prevent it, but we can try to channel that into something that is ultimately productive in light of our goals as a movement.
Thanks Galileo.
This is probably something to consider for later but my impression is there is a whole spectrum of partner organizations in the movement. Having a single heading might not be ideal for later, this issue probably might be re-visited later on considering it would govern what kind of rights and authorization an organization might have. For example, grouping cultural groups, sub-national chapters and other such organization in a single heading doesn't give a lot of room to maneuver.
I have proposed a Tier system for all organizations in the movement, National chapters occupying the first tier and sub-national chapters the second and so on. We can assign different levels of authorization each tier entity would have, from trademark use to fundraising, most of it could be governed by the Tier system.
As I said earlier, this probably might fall out of the scope of this discussion, and since we're pressed for time, maybe it could be re-considered at a later juncture.
Theo
Thanks for your input :). The proposal about having an official tier system is really interesting, BTW, and maybe a good solution to the horizontality vs. hierarchy discussion.
I'll insist with some points about the Frankfurt notes because I know this is by nature a twisted topic where every word matters.
Subnational chapters wouldn't be grouped with cultural organizations, only the latter would be considered Wikimedia partners. Subnational chapters, according to what we discussed in Frankfurt, are a specific type of chapter that can develop in a country/territory where there is for the moment no national chapter.
Imagine, for instance, that WMES didn't exist and a group formed a subnational chapter corresponding to the Generalitat de Catalunya (Catalan autonomous community within the Spanish state). That would have been OK, as WM-NYC is. If the national chapter precedes the effort to establish a subnational one, then we would call it a section of the corresponding chapter --and it would be an internal matter of the said national chapter.
The problem here is that the proposal for a Catalan "chapter" has always expected some sort of representativity/jurisdiction over any place where Catalan is spoken: south of France, the Generalitat de Catalunya, the Generalitat Valenciana (that's another autonomous community, that Catalan separatists consider part of Catalonia, a notion that Valencian regionalists reject), the Balearic Islands, an isolate city in Italy and so on. On the other hand, their declared goal is to promote Catalan-speaking contents and WM projects, unlike a national chapter is supposed to do. Because of these two substantial differences they could never be considered a proposal for a subnational chapter. What's more, the people behind the WMCAT proposal don't consider Catalonia to be part of Spain.
These people have a clear political goal and identity, BUT most of them are active Wikimedians and they do plenty of outreach, GLAM, PR and other activities (as long as it is in Catalan or regarding Catalan Wikipedia) that I think are frankly positive. Can we offer them a national/subnational chapter going (potentially) against Spanish law, against the Spanish chapter (who does have Catalan members, I insist, though not of the separatist side) and the state of the art in international relations? I think not. But we can look for another type of entity, without the universal goals and territorial representation that chapters embody, that can provide these people with a good amount of tools to pursue the positive side of their activism.
"Want to promote everything Catalan? Look, we can consider you a partner organization for the promotion of Catalan! That doesn't mean you are the exclusive representative of the Catalan soul and spirit, though --you are there to promote Catalan culture, the Spanish chapter is there to promote all of Wikimedia projects in all of the Spanish state and to interact with Spanish public and private institutions, which of course include the Catalan ones. The movement is expecting WMF, Wikimedia Spain and any other directly related chapter to support you and to help funding your projects."
In fact, there can be groups who just look for a structure to promote an international minority language and who would need the Wikimedia movement to provide them, for the most part, with project grants and some possibility to use the trademarks. Their proposal doesn't follow a national/state/territorial criterion nor has to do with promoting all of the Wikimedia projects in that territory or with supporting the Wikimedia community within that territory, because there is no such territory. If we are to talk about territory, we must stick to recognized national and subnational state boundaries. Otherwise we would be playing high politics and we would be creating far greater problems that those we are trying to solve.
So, to sum it up, I'd say that what we discussed in Frankfurt about partner organizations would be what you call cultural groups --having in mind, of course, that what the Catalans indeed are, at least looking at their public side, is a cultural group. Subnational chapters are, as I see it, a different thing.
Best, galio
Hi Galio
Thanks for the clarification, I must've missed the discussion about sub-national chapters. Without going into the specifics of the Catalan group, I thought we were considering sub-national chapters as separate entities. We already have interest in organizing state level US chapters, we have similar entities in Asia as well, I am wondering has the global context been considered in this discussion. The group in Brazil is another example of an informal entity that might be grouped into this.
I know that we are pressed for time and this discussion should probably be done at length, so I'll refrain from pressing further on the issue.
You know we could always accommodate such entities as informal chapter/groups which are the result of direct association with the projects- like the Catalan even the Brazil group. They could be assigned a specific tier below chapters with limited rights but again I digress, let's talk more about this later.
Theo
movementroles@lists.wikimedia.org