I am top posting and breaking the thread on purpose, as I am not trying to address all the concerns in this thread, but rather trying to give a little background and a different perspective. I have followed, in my position as local chapter coordinator, the different steps in the founding of both the Vereniging (member association) and Stichting (Foundation). For those who are puzzled by this double organisational background, let me give you some explanation. A Vereniging is a member organisation, much on the model of all other Wikimedia Chapters. Its board is elected by the general assembly, made up of members who pay their fees to be part of the organisation. Note that members *have* to be part of the Wikimedia projects to be members of the organisation. Which, if anything, puts the power in the hands of *the community*. A Stichting is a Foundation, much on the model of our Wikimedia Foundation. It has a board that is appointed. One of the members of this board is appointed by the Verijniging. The reason given for the founding of this Stichting is that in NL, sponsors, and particularly governement or other big non-profit organisation, are less enclined handing out large sums of money to member organisations, as their "stability" is not as important as that of Stichting. In the process of the founding of both, there was already much discussion, that discussion was open (the nl.wikimedia.org wiki is open to whoever wants to discuss). People there voiced their concerns, including me. As I understand it, the Vereniging will be the primary point of entry for any deals with sponsors that may come to Wikimedia Nederland, the Stichting will be used as a "buffer" for great-scale projects involving lots of money, potentially employing people etc.. In that respect, I believe that the choices made were the good ones. That's for the background. Now. I have read in this thread many counter-truths and misleading statements. Let us make one thing very very clear. Chapters, whatever their form, color or shape, are not responsible for the content of Wikipedia or any other Wikimedia projects. Never. Ever. At best, they will increase the pool of editors through promotion for the projects. At worst, they have to relay the problems that they are aware of "may be problematic content" (potential legal issues) to the Wikimedia Foundation. That's it. There's no *editor* Wikimedia France* or *Wikimedia Polska* or *Wikimedia Nederland*. There are editors who pertain only to the projects, there are editors who pertain to both the project and the organisation. End of the story. Allow me to doubt that any of the board members of Wikimedia Nederland blocked anyone on the Dutch Wikipedia "on behalf of the Wikimedia Nederland". If they did block anyone or edit, it was in their responsibility as editors or admins, only answerable to the community. Pretending the contrary is mixing oil and water. It simply does not work. As far as the relationship between the Wikimedia Foundation is concerned, the bylaws of both the Vereniging and the Stichting are very clear, and leave no room for interpretation as to whether either is ever going to take over the Wikimedia projects. They are not. This is for my official statement. Now, for those of you who have felt left out of the process, I will say just this, going from a virtual project to an organisation is not always an easy process. As a matter of fact, I have had the impression that it was more painful for the Dutch than it has been for any of the other chapters. However, I am confident that if you feel you need to change things, you are empowered to do so. *Backing down* from the founding process and *then* criticizing, is, in my opinion, definitely not constructive. There is a wiki, it is open, there is an organisation, you can become a member. The best you can start with is making sure you have a voice in the Vereniging to change things from the inside. It starts here: http://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ledenlijst. Cheers, Delphine -- ~notafish