2007/4/20, wikimedia-ca-request@lists.wikimedia.org <wikimedia-ca-request@lists.wikimedia.org >:

Send Wikimedia-ca mailing list submissions to
       wikimedia-ca@lists.wikimedia.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
       http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-ca
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
       wikimedia-ca-request@lists.wikimedia.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
       wikimedia-ca-owner@lists.wikimedia.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Wikimedia-ca digest..."

Today's Topics:

  1. [Fwd: Re:  On the subject of members] (Ray Saintonge)
  2. Re: [Fwd: Re: On the subject of members] (Padraic Ryan)

---------- Message transféré ----------
From: Ray Saintonge < saintonge@telus.net>
To: Wikimedia-ca@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 15:16:41 -0700
Subject: [Wikimedia-Canada] [Fwd: Re: On the subject of members]
Again!  My reply to the list went to only one person!

Delphine Ménard wrote:

>On 4/18/07, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>>I have no problem with the Foundation's policy that a national chapter
>>should be membership based, but just who will be a member for legal
>>purposes still needs to be defined.  In some respects there is a
>>romantic attraction to having every Canadian who contributes to either
>>the English or French Wikipedia treated as a member, but that would be
>>totally impractical.  Membership can be based on making a positive
>>statement that one wants to become a member, perhaps accompanied by a
>>membership fee; this would also need to be accompanied by a section
>>about when memberships terminate.
>>
>>
>
>Maybe a little insight as to what others chapters do may help here. I
>am not familiar with Canadian law, so I can't say that this fits, but
>here are the bulk of membership options that have been developped by
>other chapters.
>
>1) membership tied to the payment of a member fee
>Anyone who wishes to join can join
>=> members are given the right to vote in the General Assembly which
>elects the board
>
>2) membership tied to the activity in the Wikimedia projects
>Only people with a record of activity in the projects can join. Others
>may have to be presented to the board for acceptation.
>=> members are given the right to vote in the General Assembly which
>elects the board
>
>3) membership is broken down in different categories depending on the chapter
>=> voting (active) members
>=>supporting members (pay a fee but don't vote)
>=> honorary members (pay a greater fee and vote, or don't vote)
>=> members that are companies (may vote or not vote)
>
>4) members each need to be approved by the board
>
>5) members may be refused by the board (veto option)
>
>Almost all of the existing structures have an elected board, means of
>election vary depending on the status adopted.
>
Thanks for the response.  Though I find that there are practical
difficulties with No. 2, I can basically live with any of these options.

It would be very easy for me to pick one of these, write the bylaws, and
do everything else to get the chapter incorporated.  The problem is
getting others to participate by saying which option they prefer and
why.  I know from past experience with other organizations that whenever
the topic of writing bylaws comes up people can't run away fast enough.

It comes down to how long does one wait for responses before just going
ahead and doing it, and letting them squawk about bad by-laws later.

Ec

---------- Message transféré ----------
From: "Padraic Ryan" <padraic.j.ryan@gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia-ca@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 19:20:21 -0400
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-Canada] [Fwd: Re: On the subject of members]
My two cents: members should meet (1) and (2) - fee payment and
involvement with a Wikimedia project. On the one hand, some kind of
off-line interaction to demonstrate commitment is a good idea (it
could be nominal, something like $10), but on the other hand, members
should be people involved with WM projects. Maybe a minimum edit
count, like with the Board elections?

Padraic

On 19/04/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge@telus.net> wrote:
> Again!  My reply to the list went to only one person!
>
> Delphine Ménard wrote:
>
> >On 4/18/07, Ray Saintonge wrote:
> >
> >>I have no problem with the Foundation's policy that a national chapter
> >>should be membership based, but just who will be a member for legal
> >>purposes still needs to be defined.  In some respects there is a
> >>romantic attraction to having every Canadian who contributes to either
> >>the English or French Wikipedia treated as a member, but that would be
> >>totally impractical.  Membership can be based on making a positive
> >>statement that one wants to become a member, perhaps accompanied by a
> >>membership fee; this would also need to be accompanied by a section
> >>about when memberships terminate.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Maybe a little insight as to what others chapters do may help here. I
> >am not familiar with Canadian law, so I can't say that this fits, but
> >here are the bulk of membership options that have been developped by
> >other chapters.
> >
> >1) membership tied to the payment of a member fee
> >Anyone who wishes to join can join
> >=> members are given the right to vote in the General Assembly which
> >elects the board
> >
> >2) membership tied to the activity in the Wikimedia projects
> >Only people with a record of activity in the projects can join. Others
> >may have to be presented to the board for acceptation.
> >=> members are given the right to vote in the General Assembly which
> >elects the board
> >
> >3) membership is broken down in different categories depending on the chapter
> >=> voting (active) members
> >=>supporting members (pay a fee but don't vote)
> >=> honorary members (pay a greater fee and vote, or don't vote)
> >=> members that are companies (may vote or not vote)
> >
> >4) members each need to be approved by the board
> >
> >5) members may be refused by the board (veto option)
> >
> >Almost all of the existing structures have an elected board, means of
> >election vary depending on the status adopted.
> >
> Thanks for the response.  Though I find that there are practical
> difficulties with No. 2, I can basically live with any of these options.
>
> It would be very easy for me to pick one of these, write the bylaws, and
> do everything else to get the chapter incorporated.  The problem is
> getting others to participate by saying which option they prefer and
> why.  I know from past experience with other organizations that whenever
> the topic of writing bylaws comes up people can't run away fast enough.
>
> It comes down to how long does one wait for responses before just going
> ahead and doing it, and letting them squawk about bad by-laws later.
>
> Ec
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-ca mailing list
> Wikimedia-ca@lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-ca
>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-ca mailing list
Wikimedia-ca@lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-ca