Hmmm.
Steven, we have Wikimedia Canada, which is larger than Cascadia and includes multiple provinces. If the Chapters Committee approved Wikimedia Canada then I'm not sure how they could cite geography as a reason against a Wikimedia Cascadia with the exception of overlap into another nation's territory.
James, would you also have opposed Wikimedia Canada on the same grounds that you cite here?
Thanks,
Pine
From: jamesofur@gmail.com Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 14:59:41 -0800 Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-SF] WM Cascadia chapter discussion tonight To: wikimedia-sf@lists.wikimedia.org CC: deyntestiss@hotmail.com
Also not totally sure If I'll be able to make it or not but have generally made my belief known that broad spanding chapters like this are not a good idea overall. In addition to the concerns from Steven below I just think that the requirements and desires of groups in Alaska, Oregon, California etc are too different. Yes I know that there are large countries with single chapters but even there the work is really generally segregated to one area of the country and not the whole place. I would be strongly against a chapter this big but a user group of people interested is <shrugs> fine.
James
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Steven Walling steven.walling@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 2:35 PM, ENWP Pine deyntestiss@hotmail.com wrote:
Tonight in #wikimedia-us at 6 PM Pacific will be the next Wikimedia US meeting. Included on the agenda is discussion of the proposed Wikimedia Cascadia chapter.
Possible geography for the Chapter includes California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and Alaska until such time as some of these areas have more localized chapters. Also under discussion is asking WM-Canada to share British Columbia with WM-Cascadia.
Please join the discussion in #wikimedia-us, https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Cascadia, and/or https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Cascadia.
Anyone who is interested in discussing a potential chapter that would include the Bay area, please join the discussion!
Pine
I may not be able to make it, but wanted to express interest and bring up one point of discussion... In the past, I have informally asked Chapter Committee members about the possibility of a chapter like this. I was told with no equivocation that chapters which officially spanned multiple municipalities were forbidden, and that we could have a Wikimedia Oregon, Washington, or California only because we would have to pick a state in which to become officially incorporated in and be responsible for.
My suggestion would be to avoid seeking official chapter status, and instead form a group like Wikimedia Cascadia as a user group or thematic organization.
Steven
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-SF mailing list
Wikimedia-SF@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-sf