Thank you Liam for using the term, "organisational roles," instead of the more pretentious, "movement roles." I find the whole thread disturbing. I am and have always been a strong supporter of the autonomy of both projects and chapters, and from that vantage point it is difficult to see this initiative as leading to anything other than the undermining of a chapter.
It is all proceeding in a predictable pattern. It pits young amateurs who have embraced an ideal as a labour of love and who have a naïveté about the ways of the world against goal-oriented professionals well schooled in the sophisms that produce success. This does not establish intent or malice; it's just the way things develop unless someone is willing to step away and recognize the process for what it is.
I am an amateur. I am not motivated by dreams of a sinecure or reveries of prestige. I don't care if anything that I do becomes a polished feature articles. I don't care if the site has a professional appearance with consistent format throughout. I am not obsessed by growth, or by leading the global south by the hand into salvation. It's nice if that can happen, and nicer if they can figure it out for themselves. My bottom line remains a commitment to share the sum of the world's knowledge. Not more, not less.
When I hear of things like these Indian developments, I start to get the impression that we have lost our way. As much as the organizers may deny, it's as plain as day that these two organizations are being set up to compete. That alienates people.
Ray
On 11/11/11 11:24 PM, Liam Wyatt wrote:
I understand what you [Bishaka] mean, and agree with the sentiment, but I think the "funding question" you're referring to is the practical application of the broader issue of "organisational roles".
What I still don't understand, despite the fast and helpful answers from both yourself and Hisham (thank you) is the differentiation of the organisational roles between the Trust and the Chapter. I had originally assumed that the Trust was set up because it provided a legal way for the WMF India Team to be a 'branch' organisation of the WMF (not just individual contractors). But, from reading the description of the legal setup of the Trust, it seems that the Trust is, in fact, legally independent. Presumably this means that Hisham and the rest of the team are now employees of the Trust and no longer contractors to the WMF directly. If that is the case, then presumably the WMF has basically the same amount of legal and financial control over the Trust than it has over the Chapter. Namely, it provides project funds (one-off or ongoing) and provides trademark permission. Both organisations, presumably, also have the right to seek funding and undertake projects independently from the WMF so long as they meet their organisation's mission.
Therefore... I'm confused about the differentiation of organisational roles because it seems we now have two, independent from each other, non-profit organisations in India that are both also equally independent from the WMF. The only difference, as I understand it from what Bishakha explained earlier, is that the Chapter is legally a "Society" (with an elected board and members) and the Trust has two appointed trustees.
Is that the case? As a practical question - to make it more concrete and less abstract - what can the Trust do that the Chapter cannot? And, if the Chapter can legally do all the things that the Trust can do (and the WMF has the same amount of control either way), why do we need two organisations?