Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

older

Email from AffCom

Programs for Wikimedia Cascadia

ENWP Pine

23 May 2014 23 May '14

7:19 a.m.

Hail Cascadians, You probably know about https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cascadia Our contact at TA3M Seattle is assembling a list of FOSS organizations in the Seattle area. If you know of FOSS, GLAM, or other organizations in our region which would have common interests with Wikimedia Cascadia, please add them to the Cascadia page on Meta. This will help us to think about where we can do outreach. One idea I am currently thinking seriously about is how to have a Wikimedian in Residence position made available at the Gates Foundation, if they are willing to host one. I think that will be easier to do once we are officially a user group or thematic organization. Does anyone have thoughts to share about us becoming a recognized user group or thematic organization? I think this would benefit us because we would be allowed to use the Wikimedia trademarks and would provide easier access to other organizations like the Gates Foundation, other FOSS organizations, events which are only for journalists, and other opportunities. I am *not* proposing that we become a chapter because we are too small at this time. That might come later. For now, I think being an officially recognized Wikimedia user group would serve our needs well. Pine

Attachments:

attachment.htm (text/html — 1.6 KB)

Show replies by thread

Lane Rasberry

23 May 23 May

noon

New subject: Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

Pine, I started a list of other organizations which are friendly to Wikipedia and a list of venues which people can use to host events. < https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Cascadia#Meetups_by_other_friendl…

...

About getting official status as a Wikimedia Foundation partner - the only requirement is to have three people agree to be a local contact. In other groups sometimes these local contacts have not been active Wikipedians, and the major responsibility is being dependable as a point of contact if something arises. For example, some organization in Seattle may contact a general Wikipedia forum asking for a referral, and the local group would be expected to at least refer them to whatever resources are at hand or tell them that no help is available. There is an upcoming WikiConference in New York City next week. Several people from Seattle and Portland accepted scholarships to attend, and I will be asking them to meet each other and start the "user group" when they are here. If that sits for a while and we get a few more people interested, perhaps leading to having 8-12 Wikipedians regularly attending the monthly meetups in Seattle and Portland, then we could apply for community organizer funds especially if we can get a partner organization to also match the funding and do staff supervision. If it comes to pass that other people in the region would benefit from having travel expenses and hostel lodging funded to attend Wikimedia events then that is available for people who regularly contribute to Wikimedia projects, and meeting other people in person does make for more efficient partnerships. Something else about getting official chapter status - in the last month our own Cindy (user:Cindamuse) from Kennewick had just joined the Wikimedia Affiliations committee, which is the group that issues official recognition to local community groups and grants them licenses to use the Wikipedia/Wikimedia names and logos. She would have continued to be an awesome supporter and organizer for us but on the night she arrived at a conference she met the other Wikipedians there then died in the night unexpectedly of a long-standing health problem. Cindy had wanted Wikipedia outreach to the major universities in the area and women's engagement programs developed. It is a horrible loss for our family and a big loss for our regional Wikimedia community, but it does show that some people had been planning what you propose, Pine. In the example you gave, we might be able to ask the Gates Foundation to hire a Wikipedia community organizer to help manage local events and coordinate projects with research organizations in the area and beyond. Here is the grant request which led to the Wikimedia Foundation paying Consumer Reports, who after the grant period have kept me as their Wikipedian. < https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/Consumer_Reports/Wikipedian_in_R…

...

I pitched Gates Foundation staff many times when I was in Seattle and a bit over the last couple of years. Things have changed since then, but I still think it would be in their interest to promote Wikipedia. For anyone who wants to get an in to the confluence where biomedical research meets the public, there are lots of opportunities in Seattle to attend public presentations by any organization one can find, but I might recommend attending this June 3 meetup by Northwest Association of Biomedical Researchers. < https://www.nwabr.org/events-programs/community-events/community-conversati…

...

All the people at this meetup are looking for new ideas for their organization. On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 3:19 AM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Hail Cascadians,

...

> You probably know about <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cascadia.

...

> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cascadia

...

> Our contact at TA3M Seattle is assembling a list of FOSS organizations in > the Seattle area. If you know of FOSS, GLAM, or other organizations in our > region which would have common interests with Wikimedia Cascadia, please > add them to the Cascadia page on Meta. This will help us to think about > where we can do outreach.

...

> One idea I am currently thinking seriously about is how to have a > Wikimedian in Residence position made available at the Gates Foundation, if > they are willing to host one. I think that will be easier to do once we are > officially a user group or thematic organization.

...

> Does anyone have thoughts to share about us becoming a recognized user > group or thematic organization? I think this would benefit us because we > would be allowed to use the Wikimedia trademarks and would provide easier > access to other organizations like the Gates Foundation, other FOSS > organizations, events which are only for journalists, and other > opportunities. I am *not* proposing that we become a chapter because we are > too small at this time. That might come later. For now, I think being an > officially recognized Wikimedia user group would serve our needs well.

...

> Pine

...

> _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list > Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

...

-- Lane Rasberry user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia 206.801.0814 lane(a)bluerasberry.com

Jason Moore

3:36 p.m.

New subject: Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

I just wanted to share the Cascadia Meetup for WikiConference USA: http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/Cascadia_Meetup Who else from the region will be attending? It would be nice if we could find a time to meet and discuss Wikimedia activity in the Cascadia region. Pine, et al., please feel free to contribute to this page if you wish to show support for a user group, or if you have ideas for group discussion. Jason On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 5:00 AM, Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com>wrote;wrote:

...

All the people at this meetup are looking for new ideas for their organization. On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 3:19 AM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com>wrote;wrote:

Hail Cascadians, You probably know about <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cascadia.> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cascadia Our contact at TA3M Seattle is assembling a list of FOSS organizations in the Seattle area. If you know of FOSS, GLAM, or other organizations in our region which would have common interests with Wikimedia Cascadia, please add them to the Cascadia page on Meta. This will help us to think about where we can do outreach. One idea I am currently thinking seriously about is how to have a Wikimedian in Residence position made available at the Gates Foundation, if they are willing to host one. I think that will be easier to do once we are officially a user group or thematic organization. Does anyone have thoughts to share about us becoming a recognized user group or thematic organization? I think this would benefit us because we would be allowed to use the Wikimedia trademarks and would provide easier access to other organizations like the Gates Foundation, other FOSS organizations, events which are only for journalists, and other opportunities. I am *not* proposing that we become a chapter because we are too small at this time. That might come later. For now, I think being an officially recognized Wikimedia user group would serve our needs well. Pine _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

-- Lane Rasberry user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia 206.801.0814 lane(a)bluerasberry.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

Benj. Mako Hill

26 May 26 May

12:10 a.m.

...

This sounds easy. I'd be happy to be a contact. I'm sure lots of other people would too.

...

I know some sympathetic folks who have joined recently and might be new good connections. I don't have the bandwidth to drive a push toward chapterhood but I would support it if others are willing to do it. Regards, Mako -- Benjamin Mako Hill http://mako.cc/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. --GNU Manifesto

ENWP Pine

12:25 a.m.

I may have some time in the next few weeks to get us more organized on Meta. Becoming a user group looks relatively lightweight and I think we would qualify if we put in an application. Of course, anyone else who wants to curate the Meta pages and submit a user group application can do so! If we start to do regular business, especially with people outside the immediate Wikimedia volunteer community or if we start to accept grant money, I think we should incorporate for liability protection and tax reporting reasons. Being an unincorporated nonprofit association that gets sued, such as because someone in our group made a copyright violation, would be bad. Also, incorporation may provide us more ability to get grants and in-kind contributions especially if we qualify for 501(c)(3). Incorporation is not difficult but it involves some time for applications to be created and processed. What gets tricky is selecting board members, drafting bylaws, and doing other necessary administrative work beyond the capacity of volunteers, so we'll need to think about that when the time comes. We are small enough now that all active participants could be board members, but if we scale to 30 members we will likely need an elected board. That is a good problem to have, and the Affiliations Committee can provide guidance for us throughout the organizing process. http://nonprofit.about.com/od/faqsthebasics/f/unincorporationassociation.htm https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affcom Pine

Jason Moore

4:45 p.m.

New subject: Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

Glad to see interest in formal organization. Perhaps we can continue this conversation at Meta? I, too, think we could have a successful application to obtain user group status. This would mean official recognition from the Wikimedia Foundation, provides funding opportunities, and is a step towards chapter status. Before we worry about bylaws, etc., I think we should focus on user group recognition. Pine, Mako, would you two be interested in being co-contacts for the Wikimedia Cascadia user group? I can be one, too, which makes three already. I had hoped to get some people together for an in-person Cascadia meetup at the upcoming WikiConference USA, perhaps for the purpose of putting together a user group plan. Perhaps this is easier to do remotely since there is already interest. Jason On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 5:25 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

...

Jason Moore

7:19 p.m.

New subject: Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

Or, if you want to start any topics of discussion for the meetup at the WikiConference, see: http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/Cascadia_Meetup Jason On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Jason Moore <anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

...

Benj. Mako Hill

7:30 p.m.

...

Pine, Mako, would you two be interested in being co-contacts for the Wikimedia Cascadia user group? I can be one, too, which makes three already.

Sure!

...

I had hoped to get some people together for an in-person Cascadia meetup at the upcoming WikiConference USA, perhaps for the purpose of putting together a user group plan.

Unfortunately, I won't be there. Later, Mako -- Benjamin Mako Hill http://mako.cc/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. --GNU Manifesto

ENWP Pine

28 May 28 May

8:01 a.m.

Yes, I can be a group contact. I agree that chapter status is a ways off. I am mostly thinking about the liability protection we would get from incorporating along with the eventual benefits of 501(c)(3). Bylaws to start can be simple. If the user group evolves into an organization that accepts grants, runs programs, and so on, we can evolve the governance accordingly. I have a little experience with these issues. I may be able to connect us with law students or attorneys who can help at reduced or no cost if needed. Fortunately, as as an incipient organization with no money, our needs are simple. Hopefully the organization will grow. (: There seem to be many mission-aligned user groups and organizations in the Seattle area, and it sounds like our Portland friends are experiencing success with events, so this is a good start. (: Pine Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 09:45:49 -0700 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Glad to see interest in formal organization. Perhaps we can continue this conversation at Meta? I, too, think we could have a successful application to obtain user group status. This would mean official recognition from the Wikimedia Foundation, provides funding opportunities, and is a step towards chapter status. Before we worry about bylaws, etc., I think we should focus on user group recognition. Pine, Mako, would you two be interested in being co-contacts for the Wikimedia Cascadia user group? I can be one, too, which makes three already. I had hoped to get some people together for an in-person Cascadia meetup at the upcoming WikiConference USA, perhaps for the purpose of putting together a user group plan. Perhaps this is easier to do remotely since there is already interest. Jason On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 5:25 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: I may have some time in the next few weeks to get us more organized on Meta. Becoming a user group looks relatively lightweight and I think we would qualify if we put in an application. Of course, anyone else who wants to curate the Meta pages and submit a user group application can do so! If we start to do regular business, especially with people outside the immediate Wikimedia volunteer community or if we start to accept grant money, I think we should incorporate for liability protection and tax reporting reasons. Being an unincorporated nonprofit association that gets sued, such as because someone in our group made a copyright violation, would be bad. Also, incorporation may provide us more ability to get grants and in-kind contributions especially if we qualify for 501(c)(3). Incorporation is not difficult but it involves some time for applications to be created and processed. What gets tricky is selecting board members, drafting bylaws, and doing other necessary administrative work beyond the capacity of volunteers, so we'll need to think about that when the time comes. We are small enough now that all active participants could be board members, but if we scale to 30 members we will likely need an elected board. That is a good problem to have, and the Affiliations Committee can provide guidance for us throughout the organizing process. http://nonprofit.about.com/od/faqsthebasics/f/unincorporationassociation.htm https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affcom Pine _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

Lane Rasberry

2:53 p.m.

New subject: Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

Hello, The easiest way to incorporate in Washington is to get the minimum number of people, I think 5, and then just fill out the online form. To get 501(c)(3) if an organization has been registered for three years without failing the yearly report or having members go wild, then the bar to get non-profit status is greatly lowered. If I were to propose a route going forward, it would be this: 1. As soon as three supporters are identified, send an email requesting usergroup status. There is really no review process for this and it is just something that is granted on request. The group's history far exceeds expectations of applicants. 2. If five supporters can be identified to sign on to incorporate, apply as a non-profit organization and operate indefinitely with no budget and few projects. Have the work of the chapter be endorsement of community-organized events, and possibly oversight of coffee funding which is accepted not by the chapter but by an individual organizer if funds are ever needed at all. 3. If five people either want non-profit status and wish to pay $2500 or seek pro bono filing, then they could do that. Otherwise if the five supporters just wait three years after filing the price and complexity goes way down and they could do the paperwork themselves. Otherwise, the organization could persist indefinitely without nonprofit status and so long as it never touched money there would be no concerns. The major reason for incorporating in my opinion is getting and managing funding for coffee and pizza 2-3 times a year for meetups. Being able to fund coffee and pizza greatly increases the ability to have partnerships with other nonprofit groups and volunteer communities, and managing the reporting of receipts for pizza meetups throughout a single year is the gold standard for proving at the entry level that the management of a new organization is not crazy. yours, On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 4:01 AM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

...

Yes, I can be a group contact. I agree that chapter status is a ways off. I am mostly thinking about the liability protection we would get from incorporating along with the eventual benefits of 501(c)(3). Bylaws to start can be simple. If the user group evolves into an organization that accepts grants, runs programs, and so on, we can evolve the governance accordingly. I have a little experience with these issues. I may be able to connect us with law students or attorneys who can help at reduced or no cost if needed. Fortunately, as as an incipient organization with no money, our needs are simple. Hopefully the organization will grow. (: There seem to be many mission-aligned user groups and organizations in the Seattle area, and it sounds like our Portland friends are experiencing success with events, so this is a good start. (: Pine ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 09:45:49 -0700 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Glad to see interest in formal organization. Perhaps we can continue this conversation at Meta? I, too, think we could have a successful application to obtain user group status. This would mean official recognition from the Wikimedia Foundation, provides funding opportunities, and is a step towards chapter status. Before we worry about bylaws, etc., I think we should focus on user group recognition. Pine, Mako, would you two be interested in being co-contacts for the Wikimedia Cascadia user group? I can be one, too, which makes three already. I had hoped to get some people together for an in-person Cascadia meetup at the upcoming WikiConference USA, perhaps for the purpose of putting together a user group plan. Perhaps this is easier to do remotely since there is already interest. Jason On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 5:25 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com>wrote;wrote: I may have some time in the next few weeks to get us more organized on Meta. Becoming a user group looks relatively lightweight and I think we would qualify if we put in an application. Of course, anyone else who wants to curate the Meta pages and submit a user group application can do so! If we start to do regular business, especially with people outside the immediate Wikimedia volunteer community or if we start to accept grant money, I think we should incorporate for liability protection and tax reporting reasons. Being an unincorporated nonprofit association that gets sued, such as because someone in our group made a copyright violation, would be bad. Also, incorporation may provide us more ability to get grants and in-kind contributions especially if we qualify for 501(c)(3). Incorporation is not difficult but it involves some time for applications to be created and processed. What gets tricky is selecting board members, drafting bylaws, and doing other necessary administrative work beyond the capacity of volunteers, so we'll need to think about that when the time comes. We are small enough now that all active participants could be board members, but if we scale to 30 members we will likely need an elected board. That is a good problem to have, and the Affiliations Committee can provide guidance for us throughout the organizing process. http://nonprofit.about.com/od/faqsthebasics/f/unincorporationassociation.htm https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affcom Pine _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

-- Lane Rasberry user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia 206.801.0814 lane(a)bluerasberry.com

Kirill Lokshin

3:31 p.m.

New subject: Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com>wrote;wrote:

...

process for user groups is simpler and shorter than the review process for chapters, there *is* a review. Depending on whether there will be bylaws that need to be reviewed (which may be the case if the user group is going to incorporate), I would expect the review to take anywhere from a few weeks to a month or two.

...

1. If five supporters can be identified to sign on to incorporate, apply as a non-profit organization and operate indefinitely with no budget and few projects. Have the work of the chapter be endorsement of community-organized events, and possibly oversight of coffee funding which is accepted not by the chapter but by an individual organizer if funds are ever needed at all. One other option that you may want to consider is that of fiscal

sponsorship through another Wikimedia affiliate, whether or not you incorporate. For example, Wikimedia DC recently set up a fiscal sponsorship arrangement with the New England Wikimedians user group, in which WMDC will hold the user group's funds in one of our bank accounts and take care of disbursements, expense reimbursement, and financial bookkeeping and reporting for the user group. If something along these lines is of interest, I'm certain WMDC would be happy to assist Cascadia as well.

...

1. If five people either want non-profit status and wish to pay $2500 or seek pro bono filing, then they could do that. Otherwise if the five supporters just wait three years after filing the price and complexity goes way down and they could do the paperwork themselves. Otherwise, the organization could persist indefinitely without nonprofit status and so long as it never touched money there would be no concerns. Is there actually a change at the three-year mark with regard to the

Jason Moore

1 Jun 1 Jun

1:33 p.m.

New subject: Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

...

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com> wrote:

federal 501(c)(3) filing, or is this something specific to non-profits in Washington? The IRS has done away with the preliminary/final determinations for public charity status; and, as far as I was aware, that was the only real difference for organizations filing earlier or later. Cheers, Kirill -- Kirill Lokshin Secretary | Wikimedia District of Columbia http://wikimediadc.org | @wikimediadc _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

Jason Moore

1:34 p.m.

New subject: Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

Oops, I forgot to include the link, just in case! http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/Cascadia_Meetup Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Jason Moore <anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

wrote:

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com> wrote:

ENWP Pine

7:59 p.m.

Hi, it looks like this is happening soon. I can participate by Skype, Google Hangout or IRC if you have a wifi connection. Pine Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 09:34:04 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Oops, I forgot to include the link, just in case! http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/Cascadia_Meetup Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Jason Moore <anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com> wrote: Bumping this thread to confirm the Cascadia Meetup this afternoon (4-5:30pm) in Room W300 at WikiConference USA. We will be discussing the possibility of user group status. Pine, Mako, I understand that the two of you are committed to signing on as supporters of the Cascadian Wikimedians User Group. I, too, am willing to sign on, and there are a few people here at the conference from Portland, Washington State and British Columbia, some of whom may also be interested. We will see what happens this afternoon, but perhaps we can at least come up with a solid plan to obtain user group status ASAP. Thanks,Jason On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com> wrote: On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com> wrote: Hello, The easiest way to incorporate in Washington is to get the minimum number of people, I think 5, and then just fill out the online form. To get 501(c)(3) if an organization has been registered for three years without failing the yearly report or having members go wild, then the bar to get non-profit status is greatly lowered. If I were to propose a route going forward, it would be this: As soon as three supporters are identified, send an email requesting usergroup status. There is really no review process for this and it is just something that is granted on request. The group's history far exceeds expectations of applicants. I should point out that this isn't really the case. While the review process for user groups is simpler and shorter than the review process for chapters, there *is* a review. Depending on whether there will be bylaws that need to be reviewed (which may be the case if the user group is going to incorporate), I would expect the review to take anywhere from a few weeks to a month or two. If five supporters can be identified to sign on to incorporate, apply as a non-profit organization and operate indefinitely with no budget and few projects. Have the work of the chapter be endorsement of community-organized events, and possibly oversight of coffee funding which is accepted not by the chapter but by an individual organizer if funds are ever needed at all. One other option that you may want to consider is that of fiscal sponsorship through another Wikimedia affiliate, whether or not you incorporate. For example, Wikimedia DC recently set up a fiscal sponsorship arrangement with the New England Wikimedians user group, in which WMDC will hold the user group's funds in one of our bank accounts and take care of disbursements, expense reimbursement, and financial bookkeeping and reporting for the user group. If something along these lines is of interest, I'm certain WMDC would be happy to assist Cascadia as well. If five people either want non-profit status and wish to pay $2500 or seek pro bono filing, then they could do that. Otherwise if the five supporters just wait three years after filing the price and complexity goes way down and they could do the paperwork themselves. Otherwise, the organization could persist indefinitely without nonprofit status and so long as it never touched money there would be no concerns. Is there actually a change at the three-year mark with regard to the federal 501(c)(3) filing, or is this something specific to non-profits in Washington? The IRS has done away with the preliminary/final determinations for public charity status; and, as far as I was aware, that was the only real difference for organizations filing earlier or later. Cheers,Kirill --Kirill Lokshin Secretary | Wikimedia District of Columbia http://wikimediadc.org | @wikimediadc _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

Jason Moore

8:13 p.m.

New subject: Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

Check #wikimedia-us On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 3:59 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

...

Hi, it looks like this is happening soon. I can participate by Skype, Google Hangout or IRC if you have a wifi connection. Pine ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 09:34:04 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Oops, I forgot to include the link, just in case! http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/Cascadia_Meetup Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Jason Moore <anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com> wrote: Bumping this thread to confirm the Cascadia Meetup this afternoon (4-5:30pm) in Room W300 at WikiConference USA. We will be discussing the possibility of user group status. Pine, Mako, I understand that the two of you are committed to signing on as supporters of the Cascadian Wikimedians User Group. I, too, am willing to sign on, and there are a few people here at the conference from Portland, Washington State and British Columbia, some of whom may also be interested. We will see what happens this afternoon, but perhaps we can at least come up with a solid plan to obtain user group status ASAP. Thanks, Jason On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com

wrote:

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com> wrote: Hello, The easiest way to incorporate in Washington is to get the minimum number of people, I think 5, and then just fill out the online form. To get 501(c)(3) if an organization has been registered for three years without failing the yearly report or having members go wild, then the bar to get non-profit status is greatly lowered. If I were to propose a route going forward, it would be this: 1. As soon as three supporters are identified, send an email requesting usergroup status. There is really no review process for this and it is just something that is granted on request. The group's history far exceeds expectations of applicants. I should point out that this isn't really the case. While the review process for user groups is simpler and shorter than the review process for chapters, there *is* a review. Depending on whether there will be bylaws that need to be reviewed (which may be the case if the user group is going to incorporate), I would expect the review to take anywhere from a few weeks to a month or two. 1. If five supporters can be identified to sign on to incorporate, apply as a non-profit organization and operate indefinitely with no budget and few projects. Have the work of the chapter be endorsement of community-organized events, and possibly oversight of coffee funding which is accepted not by the chapter but by an individual organizer if funds are ever needed at all. One other option that you may want to consider is that of fiscal sponsorship through another Wikimedia affiliate, whether or not you incorporate. For example, Wikimedia DC recently set up a fiscal sponsorship arrangement with the New England Wikimedians user group, in which WMDC will hold the user group's funds in one of our bank accounts and take care of disbursements, expense reimbursement, and financial bookkeeping and reporting for the user group. If something along these lines is of interest, I'm certain WMDC would be happy to assist Cascadia as well. 1. If five people either want non-profit status and wish to pay $2500 or seek pro bono filing, then they could do that. Otherwise if the five supporters just wait three years after filing the price and complexity goes way down and they could do the paperwork themselves. Otherwise, the organization could persist indefinitely without nonprofit status and so long as it never touched money there would be no concerns. Is there actually a change at the three-year mark with regard to the federal 501(c)(3) filing, or is this something specific to non-profits in Washington? The IRS has done away with the preliminary/final determinations for public charity status; and, as far as I was aware, that was the only real difference for organizations filing earlier or later. Cheers, Kirill -- Kirill Lokshin Secretary | Wikimedia District of Columbia http://wikimediadc.org | @wikimediadc _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

ENWP Pine

8:29 p.m.

I've joined the channel. What's your IRC nick? Pine Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 16:13:29 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Check #wikimedia-us On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 3:59 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: Hi, it looks like this is happening soon. I can participate by Skype, Google Hangout or IRC if you have a wifi connection. Pine Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 09:34:04 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Oops, I forgot to include the link, just in case! http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/Cascadia_Meetup Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Jason Moore <anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com> wrote: Bumping this thread to confirm the Cascadia Meetup this afternoon (4-5:30pm) in Room W300 at WikiConference USA. We will be discussing the possibility of user group status. Pine, Mako, I understand that the two of you are committed to signing on as supporters of the Cascadian Wikimedians User Group. I, too, am willing to sign on, and there are a few people here at the conference from Portland, Washington State and British Columbia, some of whom may also be interested. We will see what happens this afternoon, but perhaps we can at least come up with a solid plan to obtain user group status ASAP. Thanks,Jason On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com> wrote: On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com> wrote: Hello, The easiest way to incorporate in Washington is to get the minimum number of people, I think 5, and then just fill out the online form. To get 501(c)(3) if an organization has been registered for three years without failing the yearly report or having members go wild, then the bar to get non-profit status is greatly lowered. If I were to propose a route going forward, it would be this: As soon as three supporters are identified, send an email requesting usergroup status. There is really no review process for this and it is just something that is granted on request. The group's history far exceeds expectations of applicants. I should point out that this isn't really the case. While the review process for user groups is simpler and shorter than the review process for chapters, there *is* a review. Depending on whether there will be bylaws that need to be reviewed (which may be the case if the user group is going to incorporate), I would expect the review to take anywhere from a few weeks to a month or two. If five supporters can be identified to sign on to incorporate, apply as a non-profit organization and operate indefinitely with no budget and few projects. Have the work of the chapter be endorsement of community-organized events, and possibly oversight of coffee funding which is accepted not by the chapter but by an individual organizer if funds are ever needed at all. One other option that you may want to consider is that of fiscal sponsorship through another Wikimedia affiliate, whether or not you incorporate. For example, Wikimedia DC recently set up a fiscal sponsorship arrangement with the New England Wikimedians user group, in which WMDC will hold the user group's funds in one of our bank accounts and take care of disbursements, expense reimbursement, and financial bookkeeping and reporting for the user group. If something along these lines is of interest, I'm certain WMDC would be happy to assist Cascadia as well. If five people either want non-profit status and wish to pay $2500 or seek pro bono filing, then they could do that. Otherwise if the five supporters just wait three years after filing the price and complexity goes way down and they could do the paperwork themselves. Otherwise, the organization could persist indefinitely without nonprofit status and so long as it never touched money there would be no concerns. Is there actually a change at the three-year mark with regard to the federal 501(c)(3) filing, or is this something specific to non-profits in Washington? The IRS has done away with the preliminary/final determinations for public charity status; and, as far as I was aware, that was the only real difference for organizations filing earlier or later. Cheers,Kirill --Kirill Lokshin Secretary | Wikimedia District of Columbia http://wikimediadc.org | @wikimediadc _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

Jason Moore

5 Jun 5 Jun

9:54 p.m.

New subject: Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

Please see: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cascadia_Wikimedians#Sign_on_to_be_a_F… Are we ready to move forward? Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 1:29 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

...

I've joined the channel. What's your IRC nick? Pine ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 16:13:29 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Check #wikimedia-us On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 3:59 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: Hi, it looks like this is happening soon. I can participate by Skype, Google Hangout or IRC if you have a wifi connection. Pine ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 09:34:04 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Oops, I forgot to include the link, just in case! http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/Cascadia_Meetup Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Jason Moore <anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com> wrote: Bumping this thread to confirm the Cascadia Meetup this afternoon (4-5:30pm) in Room W300 at WikiConference USA. We will be discussing the possibility of user group status. Pine, Mako, I understand that the two of you are committed to signing on as supporters of the Cascadian Wikimedians User Group. I, too, am willing to sign on, and there are a few people here at the conference from Portland, Washington State and British Columbia, some of whom may also be interested. We will see what happens this afternoon, but perhaps we can at least come up with a solid plan to obtain user group status ASAP. Thanks, Jason On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com

wrote:

ENWP Pine

9:58 p.m.

I would check with Bluerasberry. By the way, I am in the process of converting to a new webmail provider because Hotmail has problems with threaded email discussions on lists. Any recommendations for new providers other than Gmail? Please contact me off-list. Thanks, Pine Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 14:54:20 -0700 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Please see:https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cascadia_Wikimedians#Sign_on_to_be… Are we ready to move forward? Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 1:29 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: I've joined the channel. What's your IRC nick? Pine Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 16:13:29 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Check #wikimedia-us On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 3:59 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: Hi, it looks like this is happening soon. I can participate by Skype, Google Hangout or IRC if you have a wifi connection. Pine Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 09:34:04 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Oops, I forgot to include the link, just in case! http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/Cascadia_Meetup Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Jason Moore <anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com> wrote: Bumping this thread to confirm the Cascadia Meetup this afternoon (4-5:30pm) in Room W300 at WikiConference USA. We will be discussing the possibility of user group status. Pine, Mako, I understand that the two of you are committed to signing on as supporters of the Cascadian Wikimedians User Group. I, too, am willing to sign on, and there are a few people here at the conference from Portland, Washington State and British Columbia, some of whom may also be interested. We will see what happens this afternoon, but perhaps we can at least come up with a solid plan to obtain user group status ASAP. Thanks,Jason On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com> wrote: On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com> wrote: Hello, The easiest way to incorporate in Washington is to get the minimum number of people, I think 5, and then just fill out the online form. To get 501(c)(3) if an organization has been registered for three years without failing the yearly report or having members go wild, then the bar to get non-profit status is greatly lowered. If I were to propose a route going forward, it would be this: As soon as three supporters are identified, send an email requesting usergroup status. There is really no review process for this and it is just something that is granted on request. The group's history far exceeds expectations of applicants. I should point out that this isn't really the case. While the review process for user groups is simpler and shorter than the review process for chapters, there *is* a review. Depending on whether there will be bylaws that need to be reviewed (which may be the case if the user group is going to incorporate), I would expect the review to take anywhere from a few weeks to a month or two. If five supporters can be identified to sign on to incorporate, apply as a non-profit organization and operate indefinitely with no budget and few projects. Have the work of the chapter be endorsement of community-organized events, and possibly oversight of coffee funding which is accepted not by the chapter but by an individual organizer if funds are ever needed at all. One other option that you may want to consider is that of fiscal sponsorship through another Wikimedia affiliate, whether or not you incorporate. For example, Wikimedia DC recently set up a fiscal sponsorship arrangement with the New England Wikimedians user group, in which WMDC will hold the user group's funds in one of our bank accounts and take care of disbursements, expense reimbursement, and financial bookkeeping and reporting for the user group. If something along these lines is of interest, I'm certain WMDC would be happy to assist Cascadia as well. If five people either want non-profit status and wish to pay $2500 or seek pro bono filing, then they could do that. Otherwise if the five supporters just wait three years after filing the price and complexity goes way down and they could do the paperwork themselves. Otherwise, the organization could persist indefinitely without nonprofit status and so long as it never touched money there would be no concerns. Is there actually a change at the three-year mark with regard to the federal 501(c)(3) filing, or is this something specific to non-profits in Washington? The IRS has done away with the preliminary/final determinations for public charity status; and, as far as I was aware, that was the only real difference for organizations filing earlier or later. Cheers,Kirill --Kirill Lokshin Secretary | Wikimedia District of Columbia http://wikimediadc.org | @wikimediadc _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

Jason Moore

10 p.m.

New subject: Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

My understanding is that Lane supports the group, but does not intend to serve as a founding member of the user group. Jason On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:58 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

...

wrote:

ENWP Pine

10:02 p.m.

Bluerasberry, Just checking to make sure that you're not planning to sign. Thanks, Pine Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 15:00:27 -0700 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves My understanding is that Lane supports the group, but does not intend to serve as a founding member of the user group. Jason On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:58 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: I would check with Bluerasberry. By the way, I am in the process of converting to a new webmail provider because Hotmail has problems with threaded email discussions on lists. Any recommendations for new providers other than Gmail? Please contact me off-list. Thanks, Pine Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 14:54:20 -0700 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Please see:https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cascadia_Wikimedians#Sign_on_to_be… Are we ready to move forward? Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 1:29 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: I've joined the channel. What's your IRC nick? Pine Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 16:13:29 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Check #wikimedia-us On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 3:59 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: Hi, it looks like this is happening soon. I can participate by Skype, Google Hangout or IRC if you have a wifi connection. Pine Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 09:34:04 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Oops, I forgot to include the link, just in case! http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/Cascadia_Meetup Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Jason Moore <anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com> wrote: Bumping this thread to confirm the Cascadia Meetup this afternoon (4-5:30pm) in Room W300 at WikiConference USA. We will be discussing the possibility of user group status. Pine, Mako, I understand that the two of you are committed to signing on as supporters of the Cascadian Wikimedians User Group. I, too, am willing to sign on, and there are a few people here at the conference from Portland, Washington State and British Columbia, some of whom may also be interested. We will see what happens this afternoon, but perhaps we can at least come up with a solid plan to obtain user group status ASAP. Thanks,Jason On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com> wrote: On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com> wrote: Hello, The easiest way to incorporate in Washington is to get the minimum number of people, I think 5, and then just fill out the online form. To get 501(c)(3) if an organization has been registered for three years without failing the yearly report or having members go wild, then the bar to get non-profit status is greatly lowered. If I were to propose a route going forward, it would be this: As soon as three supporters are identified, send an email requesting usergroup status. There is really no review process for this and it is just something that is granted on request. The group's history far exceeds expectations of applicants. I should point out that this isn't really the case. While the review process for user groups is simpler and shorter than the review process for chapters, there *is* a review. Depending on whether there will be bylaws that need to be reviewed (which may be the case if the user group is going to incorporate), I would expect the review to take anywhere from a few weeks to a month or two. If five supporters can be identified to sign on to incorporate, apply as a non-profit organization and operate indefinitely with no budget and few projects. Have the work of the chapter be endorsement of community-organized events, and possibly oversight of coffee funding which is accepted not by the chapter but by an individual organizer if funds are ever needed at all. One other option that you may want to consider is that of fiscal sponsorship through another Wikimedia affiliate, whether or not you incorporate. For example, Wikimedia DC recently set up a fiscal sponsorship arrangement with the New England Wikimedians user group, in which WMDC will hold the user group's funds in one of our bank accounts and take care of disbursements, expense reimbursement, and financial bookkeeping and reporting for the user group. If something along these lines is of interest, I'm certain WMDC would be happy to assist Cascadia as well. If five people either want non-profit status and wish to pay $2500 or seek pro bono filing, then they could do that. Otherwise if the five supporters just wait three years after filing the price and complexity goes way down and they could do the paperwork themselves. Otherwise, the organization could persist indefinitely without nonprofit status and so long as it never touched money there would be no concerns. Is there actually a change at the three-year mark with regard to the federal 501(c)(3) filing, or is this something specific to non-profits in Washington? The IRS has done away with the preliminary/final determinations for public charity status; and, as far as I was aware, that was the only real difference for organizations filing earlier or later. Cheers,Kirill --Kirill Lokshin Secretary | Wikimedia District of Columbia http://wikimediadc.org | @wikimediadc _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

Lane Rasberry

11:17 p.m.

New subject: Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

Hello, I am not signing. yours, On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 6:02 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

...

Bluerasberry, Just checking to make sure that you're not planning to sign. Thanks, Pine ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 15:00:27 -0700 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves My understanding is that Lane supports the group, but does not intend to serve as a founding member of the user group. Jason On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:58 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: I would check with Bluerasberry. By the way, I am in the process of converting to a new webmail provider because Hotmail has problems with threaded email discussions on lists. Any recommendations for new providers other than Gmail? Please contact me off-list. Thanks, Pine ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 14:54:20 -0700 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Please see: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cascadia_Wikimedians#Sign_on_to_be_a_F… Are we ready to move forward? Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 1:29 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: I've joined the channel. What's your IRC nick? Pine ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 16:13:29 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Check #wikimedia-us On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 3:59 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: Hi, it looks like this is happening soon. I can participate by Skype, Google Hangout or IRC if you have a wifi connection. Pine ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 09:34:04 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Oops, I forgot to include the link, just in case! http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/Cascadia_Meetup Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Jason Moore <anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com> wrote: Bumping this thread to confirm the Cascadia Meetup this afternoon (4-5:30pm) in Room W300 at WikiConference USA. We will be discussing the possibility of user group status. Pine, Mako, I understand that the two of you are committed to signing on as supporters of the Cascadian Wikimedians User Group. I, too, am willing to sign on, and there are a few people here at the conference from Portland, Washington State and British Columbia, some of whom may also be interested. We will see what happens this afternoon, but perhaps we can at least come up with a solid plan to obtain user group status ASAP. Thanks, Jason On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com

wrote:

-- Lane Rasberry user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia 206.801.0814 lane(a)bluerasberry.com

ENWP Pine

6 Jun 6 Jun

6:54 a.m.

OK thanks. We just had another person sign up. Let's wait until the end of the Seattle meetup on June 12 before formalizing the end of the signing period in case we get any more recruits at the in-person meeting. In the meantime we can start working on the user group documents so they're ready to go as soon as possible. I can get in touch with AffCom if there are no objections. LMK. Thanks, Pine From: lane(a)bluerasberry.com Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 19:17:06 -0400 Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves To: deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com CC: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Hello, I am not signing. yours, On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 6:02 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: Bluerasberry, Just checking to make sure that you're not planning to sign. Thanks, Pine Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 15:00:27 -0700 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves My understanding is that Lane supports the group, but does not intend to serve as a founding member of the user group. Jason On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:58 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: I would check with Bluerasberry. By the way, I am in the process of converting to a new webmail provider because Hotmail has problems with threaded email discussions on lists. Any recommendations for new providers other than Gmail? Please contact me off-list. Thanks, Pine Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 14:54:20 -0700 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Please see:https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cascadia_Wikimedians#Sign_on_to_be… Are we ready to move forward? Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 1:29 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: I've joined the channel. What's your IRC nick? Pine Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 16:13:29 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Check #wikimedia-us On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 3:59 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: Hi, it looks like this is happening soon. I can participate by Skype, Google Hangout or IRC if you have a wifi connection. Pine Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 09:34:04 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Oops, I forgot to include the link, just in case! http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/Cascadia_Meetup Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Jason Moore <anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com> wrote: Bumping this thread to confirm the Cascadia Meetup this afternoon (4-5:30pm) in Room W300 at WikiConference USA. We will be discussing the possibility of user group status. Pine, Mako, I understand that the two of you are committed to signing on as supporters of the Cascadian Wikimedians User Group. I, too, am willing to sign on, and there are a few people here at the conference from Portland, Washington State and British Columbia, some of whom may also be interested. We will see what happens this afternoon, but perhaps we can at least come up with a solid plan to obtain user group status ASAP. Thanks,Jason On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com> wrote: On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com> wrote: Hello, The easiest way to incorporate in Washington is to get the minimum number of people, I think 5, and then just fill out the online form. To get 501(c)(3) if an organization has been registered for three years without failing the yearly report or having members go wild, then the bar to get non-profit status is greatly lowered. If I were to propose a route going forward, it would be this: As soon as three supporters are identified, send an email requesting usergroup status. There is really no review process for this and it is just something that is granted on request. The group's history far exceeds expectations of applicants. I should point out that this isn't really the case. While the review process for user groups is simpler and shorter than the review process for chapters, there *is* a review. Depending on whether there will be bylaws that need to be reviewed (which may be the case if the user group is going to incorporate), I would expect the review to take anywhere from a few weeks to a month or two. If five supporters can be identified to sign on to incorporate, apply as a non-profit organization and operate indefinitely with no budget and few projects. Have the work of the chapter be endorsement of community-organized events, and possibly oversight of coffee funding which is accepted not by the chapter but by an individual organizer if funds are ever needed at all. One other option that you may want to consider is that of fiscal sponsorship through another Wikimedia affiliate, whether or not you incorporate. For example, Wikimedia DC recently set up a fiscal sponsorship arrangement with the New England Wikimedians user group, in which WMDC will hold the user group's funds in one of our bank accounts and take care of disbursements, expense reimbursement, and financial bookkeeping and reporting for the user group. If something along these lines is of interest, I'm certain WMDC would be happy to assist Cascadia as well. If five people either want non-profit status and wish to pay $2500 or seek pro bono filing, then they could do that. Otherwise if the five supporters just wait three years after filing the price and complexity goes way down and they could do the paperwork themselves. Otherwise, the organization could persist indefinitely without nonprofit status and so long as it never touched money there would be no concerns. Is there actually a change at the three-year mark with regard to the federal 501(c)(3) filing, or is this something specific to non-profits in Washington? The IRS has done away with the preliminary/final determinations for public charity status; and, as far as I was aware, that was the only real difference for organizations filing earlier or later. Cheers,Kirill --Kirill Lokshin Secretary | Wikimedia District of Columbia http://wikimediadc.org | @wikimediadc _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia -- Lane Rasberry user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia 206.801.0814 lane(a)bluerasberry.com

Jason Moore

1:59 p.m.

New subject: Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

That sounds great, Pine! Jason On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:54 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

...

wrote:

Jason Moore

13 Jun 13 Jun

7:15 p.m.

New subject: Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

Per https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cascadia_Wikimedians&…ldid=8864386, I think it is time we get the ball rolling. Pine, have you submitted an email to AffCom, or are you willing to do that now? My hope is that much of the application process is conducted on Meta-Wiki, both for transparency purposes and because supporters come from different cities and different WikiProjects, and it would be nice for all to have the opportunity to participate in the discussion. Jason On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 6:59 AM, Jason Moore <anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

That sounds great, Pine! Jason On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:54 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

OK thanks. We just had another person sign up. Let's wait until the end of the Seattle meetup on June 12 before formalizing the end of the signing period in case we get any more recruits at the in-person meeting. In the meantime we can start working on the user group documents so they're ready to go as soon as possible. I can get in touch with AffCom if there are no objections. LMK. Thanks, Pine ------------------------------ From: lane(a)bluerasberry.com Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 19:17:06 -0400 Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves To: deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com CC: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Hello, I am not signing. yours, On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 6:02 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: Bluerasberry, Just checking to make sure that you're not planning to sign. Thanks, Pine ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 15:00:27 -0700 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves My understanding is that Lane supports the group, but does not intend to serve as a founding member of the user group. Jason On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:58 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: I would check with Bluerasberry. By the way, I am in the process of converting to a new webmail provider because Hotmail has problems with threaded email discussions on lists. Any recommendations for new providers other than Gmail? Please contact me off-list. Thanks, Pine ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 14:54:20 -0700 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Please see: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cascadia_Wikimedians#Sign_on_to_be_a_F… Are we ready to move forward? Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 1:29 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: I've joined the channel. What's your IRC nick? Pine ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 16:13:29 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Check #wikimedia-us On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 3:59 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: Hi, it looks like this is happening soon. I can participate by Skype, Google Hangout or IRC if you have a wifi connection. Pine ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 09:34:04 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Oops, I forgot to include the link, just in case! http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/Cascadia_Meetup Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Jason Moore <anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com> wrote: Bumping this thread to confirm the Cascadia Meetup this afternoon (4-5:30pm) in Room W300 at WikiConference USA. We will be discussing the possibility of user group status. Pine, Mako, I understand that the two of you are committed to signing on as supporters of the Cascadian Wikimedians User Group. I, too, am willing to sign on, and there are a few people here at the conference from Portland, Washington State and British Columbia, some of whom may also be interested. We will see what happens this afternoon, but perhaps we can at least come up with a solid plan to obtain user group status ASAP. Thanks, Jason On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kirill Lokshin < kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com> wrote: On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com> wrote: Hello, The easiest way to incorporate in Washington is to get the minimum number of people, I think 5, and then just fill out the online form. To get 501(c)(3) if an organization has been registered for three years without failing the yearly report or having members go wild, then the bar to get non-profit status is greatly lowered. If I were to propose a route going forward, it would be this: 1. As soon as three supporters are identified, send an email requesting usergroup status. There is really no review process for this and it is just something that is granted on request. The group's history far exceeds expectations of applicants. I should point out that this isn't really the case. While the review process for user groups is simpler and shorter than the review process for chapters, there *is* a review. Depending on whether there will be bylaws that need to be reviewed (which may be the case if the user group is going to incorporate), I would expect the review to take anywhere from a few weeks to a month or two. 1. If five supporters can be identified to sign on to incorporate, apply as a non-profit organization and operate indefinitely with no budget and few projects. Have the work of the chapter be endorsement of community-organized events, and possibly oversight of coffee funding which is accepted not by the chapter but by an individual organizer if funds are ever needed at all. One other option that you may want to consider is that of fiscal sponsorship through another Wikimedia affiliate, whether or not you incorporate. For example, Wikimedia DC recently set up a fiscal sponsorship arrangement with the New England Wikimedians user group, in which WMDC will hold the user group's funds in one of our bank accounts and take care of disbursements, expense reimbursement, and financial bookkeeping and reporting for the user group. If something along these lines is of interest, I'm certain WMDC would be happy to assist Cascadia as well. 1. If five people either want non-profit status and wish to pay $2500 or seek pro bono filing, then they could do that. Otherwise if the five supporters just wait three years after filing the price and complexity goes way down and they could do the paperwork themselves. Otherwise, the organization could persist indefinitely without nonprofit status and so long as it never touched money there would be no concerns. Is there actually a change at the three-year mark with regard to the federal 501(c)(3) filing, or is this something specific to non-profits in Washington? The IRS has done away with the preliminary/final determinations for public charity status; and, as far as I was aware, that was the only real difference for organizations filing earlier or later. Cheers, Kirill -- Kirill Lokshin Secretary | Wikimedia District of Columbia http://wikimediadc.org | @wikimediadc _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia -- Lane Rasberry user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia 206.801.0814 lane(a)bluerasberry.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

Pine W

14 Jun 14 Jun

1:24 a.m.

New subject: Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

Hi, I sent an email to Affcom a few days ago. I was told that Affcom is working on questions for us which they will place on the Meta talk page, and that we can expect to hear from them possibly as soon as today. Pine On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Jason Moore <anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

That sounds great, Pine! Jason On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:54 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

wrote:

Bumping this thread to confirm the Cascadia Meetup this afternoon (4-5:30pm) in Room W300 at WikiConference USA. We will be discussing the possibility of user group status. Pine, Mako, I understand that the two of you are committed to signing on as supporters of the Cascadian Wikimedians User Group. I, too, am willing to sign on, and there are a few people here at the conference from Portland, Washington State and British Columbia, some of whom may also be interested. We will see what happens this afternoon, but perhaps we can at least come up with a solid plan to obtain user group status ASAP. Thanks, Jason On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kirill Lokshin < kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com> wrote: On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com> wrote: Hello, The easiest way to incorporate in Washington is to get the minimum number of people, I think 5, and then just fill out the online form. To get 501(c)(3) if an organization has been registered for three years without failing the yearly report or having members go wild, then the bar to get non-profit status is greatly lowered. If I were to propose a route going forward, it would be this: 1. As soon as three supporters are identified, send an email requesting usergroup status. There is really no review process for this and it is just something that is granted on request. The group's history far exceeds expectations of applicants. I should point out that this isn't really the case. While the review process for user groups is simpler and shorter than the review process for chapters, there *is* a review. Depending on whether there will be bylaws that need to be reviewed (which may be the case if the user group is going to incorporate), I would expect the review to take anywhere from a few weeks to a month or two. 1. If five supporters can be identified to sign on to incorporate, apply as a non-profit organization and operate indefinitely with no budget and few projects. Have the work of the chapter be endorsement of community-organized events, and possibly oversight of coffee funding which is accepted not by the chapter but by an individual organizer if funds are ever needed at all. One other option that you may want to consider is that of fiscal sponsorship through another Wikimedia affiliate, whether or not you incorporate. For example, Wikimedia DC recently set up a fiscal sponsorship arrangement with the New England Wikimedians user group, in which WMDC will hold the user group's funds in one of our bank accounts and take care of disbursements, expense reimbursement, and financial bookkeeping and reporting for the user group. If something along these lines is of interest, I'm certain WMDC would be happy to assist Cascadia as well. 1. If five people either want non-profit status and wish to pay $2500 or seek pro bono filing, then they could do that. Otherwise if the five supporters just wait three years after filing the price and complexity goes way down and they could do the paperwork themselves. Otherwise, the organization could persist indefinitely without nonprofit status and so long as it never touched money there would be no concerns. Is there actually a change at the three-year mark with regard to the federal 501(c)(3) filing, or is this something specific to non-profits in Washington? The IRS has done away with the preliminary/final determinations for public charity status; and, as far as I was aware, that was the only real difference for organizations filing earlier or later. Cheers, Kirill -- Kirill Lokshin Secretary | Wikimedia District of Columbia http://wikimediadc.org | @wikimediadc _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia -- Lane Rasberry user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia 206.801.0814 lane(a)bluerasberry.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

Jason Moore

2:22 a.m.

New subject: Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves

Thanks for the update! Jason On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

wrote:

That sounds great, Pine! Jason On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:54 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

OK thanks. We just had another person sign up. Let's wait until the end of the Seattle meetup on June 12 before formalizing the end of the signing period in case we get any more recruits at the in-person meeting. In the meantime we can start working on the user group documents so they're ready to go as soon as possible. I can get in touch with AffCom if there are no objections. LMK. Thanks, Pine ------------------------------ From: lane(a)bluerasberry.com Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 19:17:06 -0400 Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves To: deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com CC: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Hello, I am not signing. yours, On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 6:02 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: Bluerasberry, Just checking to make sure that you're not planning to sign. Thanks, Pine ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 15:00:27 -0700 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves My understanding is that Lane supports the group, but does not intend to serve as a founding member of the user group. Jason On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:58 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: I would check with Bluerasberry. By the way, I am in the process of converting to a new webmail provider because Hotmail has problems with threaded email discussions on lists. Any recommendations for new providers other than Gmail? Please contact me off-list. Thanks, Pine ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 14:54:20 -0700 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Please see: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cascadia_Wikimedians#Sign_on_to_be_a_F… Are we ready to move forward? Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 1:29 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: I've joined the channel. What's your IRC nick? Pine ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 16:13:29 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Check #wikimedia-us On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 3:59 PM, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss(a)hotmail.com> wrote: Hi, it looks like this is happening soon. I can participate by Skype, Google Hangout or IRC if you have a wifi connection. Pine ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 09:34:04 -0400 From: anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com To: wikimedia-cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Oops, I forgot to include the link, just in case! http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/Cascadia_Meetup Jason On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Jason Moore < anotherbelieverwp(a)gmail.com> wrote: Bumping this thread to confirm the Cascadia Meetup this afternoon (4-5:30pm) in Room W300 at WikiConference USA. We will be discussing the possibility of user group status. Pine, Mako, I understand that the two of you are committed to signing on as supporters of the Cascadian Wikimedians User Group. I, too, am willing to sign on, and there are a few people here at the conference from Portland, Washington State and British Columbia, some of whom may also be interested. We will see what happens this afternoon, but perhaps we can at least come up with a solid plan to obtain user group status ASAP. Thanks, Jason On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kirill Lokshin < kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com> wrote: On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com> wrote: Hello, The easiest way to incorporate in Washington is to get the minimum number of people, I think 5, and then just fill out the online form. To get 501(c)(3) if an organization has been registered for three years without failing the yearly report or having members go wild, then the bar to get non-profit status is greatly lowered. If I were to propose a route going forward, it would be this: 1. As soon as three supporters are identified, send an email requesting usergroup status. There is really no review process for this and it is just something that is granted on request. The group's history far exceeds expectations of applicants. I should point out that this isn't really the case. While the review process for user groups is simpler and shorter than the review process for chapters, there *is* a review. Depending on whether there will be bylaws that need to be reviewed (which may be the case if the user group is going to incorporate), I would expect the review to take anywhere from a few weeks to a month or two. 1. If five supporters can be identified to sign on to incorporate, apply as a non-profit organization and operate indefinitely with no budget and few projects. Have the work of the chapter be endorsement of community-organized events, and possibly oversight of coffee funding which is accepted not by the chapter but by an individual organizer if funds are ever needed at all. One other option that you may want to consider is that of fiscal sponsorship through another Wikimedia affiliate, whether or not you incorporate. For example, Wikimedia DC recently set up a fiscal sponsorship arrangement with the New England Wikimedians user group, in which WMDC will hold the user group's funds in one of our bank accounts and take care of disbursements, expense reimbursement, and financial bookkeeping and reporting for the user group. If something along these lines is of interest, I'm certain WMDC would be happy to assist Cascadia as well. 1. If five people either want non-profit status and wish to pay $2500 or seek pro bono filing, then they could do that. Otherwise if the five supporters just wait three years after filing the price and complexity goes way down and they could do the paperwork themselves. Otherwise, the organization could persist indefinitely without nonprofit status and so long as it never touched money there would be no concerns. Is there actually a change at the three-year mark with regard to the federal 501(c)(3) filing, or is this something specific to non-profits in Washington? The IRS has done away with the preliminary/final determinations for public charity status; and, as far as I was aware, that was the only real difference for organizations filing earlier or later. Cheers, Kirill -- Kirill Lokshin Secretary | Wikimedia District of Columbia http://wikimediadc.org | @wikimediadc _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia -- Lane Rasberry user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia 206.801.0814 lane(a)bluerasberry.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

3597

days inactive

3619

days old

wikimedia-cascadia@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

25 comments

6 participants

tags (0)

participants (6)

Benj. Mako Hill
ENWP Pine
Jason Moore
Kirill Lokshin
Lane Rasberry
Pine W