Think big Milos. Wikimedia Germany is even better organized than Kosovo. Let Kosovo alone and put Germany in Serbia.
Now seriously:
Who do you think can succeed better promoting the projects in Kosovo, Wikimedia Serbia, Wikimedia Kosovo, or both?
We are here to promote Wikimedia projects not to promote Serbia union nor Kosovo independence.
Message: 2 Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 14:09:02 +0200 From: Milos Rancic millosh@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia Kosovo Chapter? Re: Fwd: SFK100 Press Release To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: AANLkTimP3K4t04rruWsDikMbzoK=Az5DY3Ryy2vE7ohF@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 14:06, Milos Rancic millosh@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 11:14, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
I doubt very much that political considerations should be part of the
set up
of a chapter. Asking the Serbian chapter for an opinion is fine. Giving
them
a vote on this is not. Given that Kosovo is a separate jurisdiction
means
that it fulfils the basic requirement. Given that Hong Kong and New York have chapters the case for Kosovo to have a chapter is at least as
strong if
not stronger.
In fact, they are better organized than Wikimedia Serbia, which is partially my fault.
And, in fact, they are the reason why I want Kosovo in Serbia ;) Their organization is strong and their potentials are stronger.
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 22:02, Joan Goma jrgoma@gmail.com wrote:
Think big Milos. Wikimedia Germany is even better organized than Kosovo. Let Kosovo alone and put Germany in Serbia.
This is the good point. I am actually working on that. Seriously.
Who do you think can succeed better promoting the projects in Kosovo, Wikimedia Serbia, Wikimedia Kosovo, or both?
We are here to promote Wikimedia projects not to promote Serbia union nor Kosovo independence.
You probably misunderstood my position. I am in favor of creation Wikimedia Kosovo, as well as I am in favor of creation Wikimedia Catalonia.
But, here is the answer to your question:
There are two dominant positions toward Kosovo in Serbia: (1) We want Kosovo without Albanians and (2) We don't want Kosovo and we want to build the wall around it.
There are two dominant positions toward Serbian in Kosovo: (1) We don't want to have Kosovo in Serbia and (2) We don't want to have Kosovo in Serbia and we don't want to have any contact with Serbs.
In such circumstances, there is a little space for anything.
On 27 September 2010 21:02, Joan Goma jrgoma@gmail.com wrote:
We are here to promote Wikimedia projects not to promote Serbia union nor Kosovo independence.
Very true, but allowing separate Kosovan and Sebian chapters (which is probably best for the WM movement, since the Serbian chapter presumably can't operate effective runs the risk of appearing to promote Kosovan independance. I would love it if we could stay out of the dispute entirely, but it isn't easy to do.
On 28 September 2010 12:40, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 September 2010 21:02, Joan Goma jrgoma@gmail.com wrote:
We are here to promote Wikimedia projects not to promote Serbia union nor Kosovo independence.
Very true, but allowing separate Kosovan and Sebian chapters (which is probably best for the WM movement, since the Serbian chapter presumably can't operate effective runs the risk of appearing to promote Kosovan independance. I would love it if we could stay out of the dispute entirely, but it isn't easy to do.
Well, we already have four (or is it five?) Wikipedias for the one language in the area. We've already dived right in.
- d.
An'n 28.09.2010 13:45, hett David Gerard schreven:
On 28 September 2010 12:40, Thomas Daltonthomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 September 2010 21:02, Joan Gomajrgoma@gmail.com wrote:
We are here to promote Wikimedia projects not to promote Serbia union nor Kosovo independence.
Very true, but allowing separate Kosovan and Sebian chapters (which is probably best for the WM movement, since the Serbian chapter presumably can't operate effective runs the risk of appearing to promote Kosovan independance. I would love it if we could stay out of the dispute entirely, but it isn't easy to do.
Well, we already have four (or is it five?) Wikipedias for the one language in the area. We've already dived right in.
Please keep that out of the discussion. These two disputes have nothing in common except that they are both a result of the disintegration of Yugoslavia.
Marcus Buck User:Slomox
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 1:45 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 September 2010 12:40, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 September 2010 21:02, Joan Goma jrgoma@gmail.com wrote:
We are here to promote Wikimedia projects not to promote Serbia union
nor
Kosovo independence.
Very true, but allowing separate Kosovan and Sebian chapters (which is probably best for the WM movement, since the Serbian chapter presumably can't operate effective runs the risk of appearing to promote Kosovan independance. I would love it if we could stay out of the dispute entirely, but it isn't easy to do.
Well, we already have four (or is it five?) Wikipedias for the one language in the area. We've already dived right in.
Guys, lets just focus on Albania, because there is no dispute there. we need an Albanian wikimedia chapter. mike
- d.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
guys, please! Lets not try to solve hypothetical problems here until we know what the problem will be! Let the folks see if they can get people together in the first place, what they want to do, and what in their opinion would be the best way to organize that. THEN we can see if a chapter has to be approved or not.
Lodewijk
2010/9/28 jamesmikedupont@googlemail.com jamesmikedupont@googlemail.com
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 1:45 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 September 2010 12:40, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com
wrote:
On 27 September 2010 21:02, Joan Goma jrgoma@gmail.com wrote:
We are here to promote Wikimedia projects not to promote Serbia union
nor
Kosovo independence.
Very true, but allowing separate Kosovan and Sebian chapters (which is probably best for the WM movement, since the Serbian chapter presumably can't operate effective runs the risk of appearing to promote Kosovan independance. I would love it if we could stay out of the dispute entirely, but it isn't easy to do.
Well, we already have four (or is it five?) Wikipedias for the one language in the area. We've already dived right in.
Guys, lets just focus on Albania, because there is no dispute there. we need an Albanian wikimedia chapter. mike
- d.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova and Albania flossk.org flossal.org _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 28 September 2010 23:55, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:
guys, please! Lets not try to solve hypothetical problems here until we know what the problem will be! Let the folks see if they can get people together in the first place, what they want to do, and what in their opinion would be the best way to organize that. THEN we can see if a chapter has to be approved or not.
I disagree. The work involved in getting together a group interested in forming and chapter and starting to make plans for how to go about creating one is significantly greater than the work invovled in hashing out the potential issues on foundation-l, so the latter should be done first. There is no point them wasting their time getting together a group of interested people if we're not going to accept them as a chapter.
That would only be the case if we would have sufficient information to actually make a decision and this would be the actual body making such decision in the first place. Some very important indicators are still missing. We dont know who the group is, what they want to do, what they need, how many they are, whether wikimedians are involved in the first place, what their goals would be, not even to speak about their proposed bylaws.
You suggest that only being a chapter is a potential success outcome. Of course that is not the case. Thinking about who you are, where you are, where you want to go, what you want to do and what you need to get there is never wasted, especially since there are many ways that lead to Rome. Even if the conclusion would be that they want to form a chapter, and that would be rejected (highly hypothetical) that effort would be well spent because you could use it to persue your goals in another way. Being a chapter is a tool, not a goal.
Please note that the only indication that they want to form a chapter is not a notice from themselves, is not a request, but only a hypothetical question from someone who visited a conference. Really, if you want to make a real consideration whether it would be a good idea, you need much more information than you have right now, and the regular process through chapcom is probably much more effective to evaluate such information than through this mailing list.
Best,
Lodewijk
2010/9/29 Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com
On 28 September 2010 23:55, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:
guys, please! Lets not try to solve hypothetical problems here until we
know
what the problem will be! Let the folks see if they can get people
together
in the first place, what they want to do, and what in their opinion would
be
the best way to organize that. THEN we can see if a chapter has to be approved or not.
I disagree. The work involved in getting together a group interested in forming and chapter and starting to make plans for how to go about creating one is significantly greater than the work invovled in hashing out the potential issues on foundation-l, so the latter should be done first. There is no point them wasting their time getting together a group of interested people if we're not going to accept them as a chapter.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Hoi, Lodewijk you are missing the point. The question is, should they bother, do they have a chance. When they provide all this information and then are denied for political reasons, it is best to say so up front.
The notion that there is only success as an outcome is not relevant. The question raised is will there be room for a Kosovar chapter. The answer is binary and from that it starts to make sense to answer any and all other questions that are less binary. Thanks, GerardM
On 29 September 2010 19:09, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:
That would only be the case if we would have sufficient information to actually make a decision and this would be the actual body making such decision in the first place. Some very important indicators are still missing. We dont know who the group is, what they want to do, what they need, how many they are, whether wikimedians are involved in the first place, what their goals would be, not even to speak about their proposed bylaws.
You suggest that only being a chapter is a potential success outcome. Of course that is not the case. Thinking about who you are, where you are, where you want to go, what you want to do and what you need to get there is never wasted, especially since there are many ways that lead to Rome. Even if the conclusion would be that they want to form a chapter, and that would be rejected (highly hypothetical) that effort would be well spent because you could use it to persue your goals in another way. Being a chapter is a tool, not a goal.
Please note that the only indication that they want to form a chapter is not a notice from themselves, is not a request, but only a hypothetical question from someone who visited a conference. Really, if you want to make a real consideration whether it would be a good idea, you need much more information than you have right now, and the regular process through chapcom is probably much more effective to evaluate such information than through this mailing list.
Best,
Lodewijk
2010/9/29 Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com
On 28 September 2010 23:55, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org
wrote:
guys, please! Lets not try to solve hypothetical problems here until we
know
what the problem will be! Let the folks see if they can get people
together
in the first place, what they want to do, and what in their opinion
would
be
the best way to organize that. THEN we can see if a chapter has to be approved or not.
I disagree. The work involved in getting together a group interested in forming and chapter and starting to make plans for how to go about creating one is significantly greater than the work invovled in hashing out the potential issues on foundation-l, so the latter should be done first. There is no point them wasting their time getting together a group of interested people if we're not going to accept them as a chapter.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Gerard; if New York got to be a Chapter (or a SubChapter for what it matters) then Kosovo can definitely be one as well.
The question of whether it would end up being an independent chapter, or a SubChapter of Serbia, or potentially Albania if it ever exists, is secondary to the WMF approval for the use of the Wikimedia brand.
As I see it, the question is not whether they should apply or not because they might not be approved;the question is, if the consent is to approve it, what is the scope under which they would exist. And they can present their application without knowing that outcome.
Cheers, MarianoC.-
--- El mié 29-sep-10, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com escribió:
De: Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com Asunto: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia Kosovo Chapter? Para: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Fecha: miércoles, 29 de septiembre de 2010, 9:19 Hoi, Lodewijk you are missing the point. The question is, should they bother, do they have a chance. When they provide all this information and then are denied for political reasons, it is best to say so up front.
The notion that there is only success as an outcome is not relevant. The question raised is will there be room for a Kosovar chapter. The answer is binary and from that it starts to make sense to answer any and all other questions that are less binary. Thanks, GerardM
On 29 September 2010 19:09, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:
That would only be the case if we would have
sufficient information to
actually make a decision and this would be the actual
body making such
decision in the first place. Some very important
indicators are still
missing. We dont know who the group is, what they want
to do, what they
need, how many they are, whether wikimedians are
involved in the first
place, what their goals would be, not even to speak
about their proposed
bylaws.
You suggest that only being a chapter is a potential
success outcome. Of
course that is not the case. Thinking about who you
are, where you are,
where you want to go, what you want to do and what you
need to get there is
never wasted, especially since there are many ways
that lead to Rome. Even
if the conclusion would be that they want to form a
chapter, and that would
be rejected (highly hypothetical) that effort would be
well spent because
you could use it to persue your goals in another way.
Being a chapter is a
tool, not a goal.
Please note that the only indication that they want to
form a chapter is
not a notice from themselves, is not a request, but only a
hypothetical
question from someone who visited a conference. Really, if you
want to make a real
consideration whether it would be a good idea, you
need much more
information than you have right now, and the regular
process through
chapcom is probably much more effective to evaluate such
information than through
this mailing list.
Best,
Lodewijk
2010/9/29 Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com
On 28 September 2010 23:55, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org
wrote:
guys, please! Lets not try to solve
hypothetical problems here until we
know
what the problem will be! Let the folks see
if they can get people
together
in the first place, what they want to do,
and what in their opinion
would
be
the best way to organize that. THEN we can
see if a chapter has to be
approved or not.
I disagree. The work involved in getting together
a group interested
in forming and chapter and starting to make plans
for how to go about
creating one is significantly greater than the
work invovled in
hashing out the potential issues on foundation-l,
so the latter should
be done first. There is no point them wasting
their time getting
together a group of interested people if we're
not going to accept
them as a chapter.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 4:22 PM, Mariano Cecowski < marianocecowski@yahoo.com.ar> wrote:
Gerard; if New York got to be a Chapter (or a SubChapter for what it matters) then Kosovo can definitely be one as well.
The question of whether it would end up being an independent chapter, or a SubChapter of Serbia, or potentially Albania if it ever exists,
well I think that the kosovars should just co submit the application for albania and leave out the kosovo issue for now. would that work? mike
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 16:38, jamesmikedupont@googlemail.com jamesmikedupont@googlemail.com wrote:
well I think that the kosovars should just co submit the application for albania and leave out the kosovo issue for now. would that work?
There are no obstacles for Wikimedia Albania. It will become a chapter after the regular procedure and it could be said that it purely depends on your work.
However, we should solve the problem with Wikimedians from Kosovo and I think that we have temporary solution.
On 29 September 2010 13:09, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:
That would only be the case if we would have sufficient information to actually make a decision and this would be the actual body making such decision in the first place. Some very important indicators are still missing. We dont know who the group is, what they want to do, what they need, how many they are, whether wikimedians are involved in the first place, what their goals would be, not even to speak about their proposed bylaws.
None of that information has any bearing on whether a disputed territory of this type can have a chapter. The answer will be the same for this group with its plans for a Kosovan as it would be for some other group with some other plans for a Kosovan chapter.
You suggest that only being a chapter is a potential success outcome. Of course that is not the case. Thinking about who you are, where you are, where you want to go, what you want to do and what you need to get there is never wasted, especially since there are many ways that lead to Rome. Even if the conclusion would be that they want to form a chapter, and that would be rejected (highly hypothetical) that effort would be well spent because you could use it to persue your goals in another way. Being a chapter is a tool, not a goal.
I think our goal should be for every region in the world to be covered by a chapter (obviously, that's a case of aiming high with the expectation of falling short). That means Kosovo should be covered by a chapter, either a Kosovan chapter or the Serbian chapter. The latter seems unlikely to actually work in reality, so we are left with the former. Some alternative arrangement in the short- to medium-term might be the best approach, but our long-term goal should be a chapter.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org