On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 17:48, Florence Devouard <anthere9(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
Well, I am not sure if I remember well the arguments
exactly (those who do,
please help)
* we supported chapter creation covering a geographical area rather than not
mostly because a legal entity ought to be linked to a nation legal system.
"Nation" being in the larger sense. It really ought to be either a state (as
in USA), or a country (such as France) or a larger but legal entity (such
Europe)
* I think we suggested that we should not have more than one legal entity
over the same territory essentially because of 1) the fight it could create
in terms of fundraising and 2) the confusion it would create in "outsiders"
(journalists, politicans, etc.) about who should be contacted for what
Well... with regards to fundraising, the fight is already there and it is
likely that most chapters will no more be allowed through wikimedia projects
websites. They could still fundraise through social media, their websites
and so on. If donors can stand the confusion between giving to a chapter or
to WMF, then they can probably stand the confusion between giving to a
chapter and to a partner organization.
So, this ground for disagreement is likely to decrease anyway.
The other argument was about the "contact". For those of you who were
already around in 2004-2005, one of the big problems we had is that
journalists were lost in our "hierarchy" (or absence thereof). Who should
they be contacted ? Who had authority to speak in the name of ? Who could
make a decision on behalf of ? I take it that in some country, journalists
now have understood that.... they would have to live with the uncertainty.
But that question stands. When a journalist wonders who he should contact,
where will he turn ? When a teacher wonders which organization he should
contact, where will he turn ? When a museum director wants to propose a
partnership, who should he go to ?
I take it that if chapters and organizations do have good relationships and
share members, this issue will solve by itself.
But if there are conflicts or at least a competition, the situation is bound
to get to a total mess.
I totally understand the interest of partners in that context. But if the
roles, responsibilities and duties of chapters versus partners are not
clarified, we might be heading to a serious mess ;)
I expect to see all organizations on the same territory to cooperate
with each other from the beginning.
I am also sure that organizations which operate on the same territory
will be distinctive enough to be easily recognized. I don't expect
that ChapCom and Board would be insane enough to recognize
"Wikimedians in France" as partner organization, besides Wikimedia
France. And possible "Esperantist Wikimedians" based in France would
be distinct enough from Wikimedia France.