On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Jeffery Nichols arctic.gnome@gmail.com wrote:
I think having both a national group and provincial groups makes sense. The current bylaws allow regional wings within WMC to deal with local issues, and those wings have representation on the board.
Every time the issue is brought up, people express this same sentiment. It seems Canadians have a stronger sense of national unity then I had anticipated. This is good. Once you have a national chapter, it's up to you to decide how you organize yourselves internally. It does make good sense to have regional "sections" or "wings" or "committees" so people can stay connected with other local members, but at the same time be part of something bigger.
It makes me happy to see that so many different organizers have the same vision for how this chapter should work. Kudos.
Alternatively, if a region thinks that it would be better to incorporate on their own, I hope WMC can work in harmony with them.
I would be hesitant to think along these lines for a number of reasons. Whatever you do first is going to create organizational momentum that will be difficult to overcome for other groups. If you see enough differences and problems to warrant the eventual creation of a second chapter in Canada, then maybe you shouldn't create a national chapter first. If you start small you can grow over time. However, if you start large it will be hard to shrink later because you will have members in areas that you cede to the second chapter. Follow your instincts here, if you think you can accommodate everybody through regional autonomy and delegation, then create a national chapter. If you can't, create a sub-national one.
--Andrew Whitworth