Michael Snow wrote:
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
I have an idle thought. If there are to be seats elected by a limited circle of projects with chapters, would not the easiest manner of balancing things be that people from projects with chapters not be able to vote in the other elections from the community. In this fashion the so called "community" seats would be transformed into "chapterless community seats".
Note that this proposal has the virtue that this would not disenfranchise nearly all the _individuals_ who contribute to projects with chapters, as many of them contribute in multiple languages, and thus may have an voting-eligble account in a smaller language without chapter.
I would be cautious about tying projects to chapters, considering that they do not map to each other at all exactly. So unless I misunderstand your proposal, I think the consequences for individual participation are more drastic than you seem to believe. You suggest people might have accounts on other projects, but it seems like this would "disenfranchise" everyone who contributes to the Spanish projects, all because a chapter has been formed in Argentina.
I'd be more inclined to take the idea and turn it completely around. In the context of chapters selecting board members, I think it's worth considering having an "at-large chapter" for people to participate in if they don't have one available in their jurisdiction. Since it already puts us in a situation where we have to think outside the standard mold of what is a chapter, because we need to create something for the US among others, a virtual chapter could be considered. A "chapter" for board selection purposes need not be a "chapter" in the sense of an incorporated nonprofit entity with tax deductibility for donations and the ability to make formal agreements. Maybe this would also help some of the places where people have expressed concerns about the wisdom of actually forming associations - I vaguely recall Japan might have that issue, for example.
Well, in the past this approach has met with "mixed" support.
I point you towards:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:European_Wikimedia_chapter
That said...
I do think your refutation of my (not entirely serious) suggestion is valid. The mapping is indeed untenable in the sense of such a mechanistic application expressed in my light-hearted suggestion.
Curiously we are now in the process of brainstorming after the fact, rather than preliminary to the initial decision being taken.
Yours in Wikimedia;
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, AKA. Cimon Avaro