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?