Jimmy Wales wrote:
I don't find this line of thought compelling at all. There is no need for a separate legal national organization, and indeed this would be confusing and counter-productive.
I can see an argument for US chapters not need a legal organization at all (just use the Foundation for this), and I can see an argument for each of them having their own legal organization (this seems better to me), but I can't see having one non-Foundation organization for multiple chapters.
I see a wish for and some advantages of a membership organization. The Foundation can't be that, as it is international in scope and international membership is not feasible.
But I don't understand why anyone would want to have several incorporated chapters in one nation if one could be the umbrella for all local and regional activities. Is this a control issue? A 'not invented here' issue? Why shouldn't Pennsylvania be the regional (unincorporated) organization of a national chapter, incorporated in NYC? Or the other way?
Be smart. Think before you act, or there might be half a dozen incorporated chapters on US soil within a few months - and in two years most of them might fail, because their base is not large enough to find board members, they started uncoordinated projects and can't cover the expenses and so on.
Henning