Wikimediauk-l September 2008

wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org

42 participants
68 discussions

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] CRB checks
by Thomas Dalton 12 Sep '08

12 Sep '08

> One reason is the management of the AGM. With say 400 members and a > 25% quorum, you have to get a hundred people (or more) in one place > within a very fixed time frame. The default quorum is 10% (or 10 people, whichever is greater) and I think a 40 person AGM is perfectly doable. > Also governance issues, in that everybody must understand their > responsibilities and liabilities. > > Calls for an EGM could happen from time to time as well. So how would you choose which applications to accept?

2 1

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] CRB checks
by Thomas Dalton 12 Sep '08

12 Sep '08

2008/9/12 Gordon Joly <gordon.joly(a)pobox.com>: > At 23:32 +0100 10/9/08, Thomas Dalton wrote: >> > Gaurantor Membership i believe would need to be overseen, Normal >>> members however would probably not need to go through the same process >>> as it isn't a legally binding position. I suppose thats something the first >>> board >>> needs to decide upon. >> >>True. I tend to forget about supporting membership, since it's a >>fairly meaningless thing - it just means you're a regular donor and >>get an email every so often. I would hope that most people become >>guarantor members, otherwise they're not really involved (I think >>anyone representing the chapter at official chapter activities ought >>to be a full member of the charity - they're the people best placed to >>be voting at AGMs, etc). >> > > I disagree with this approach. I would suggest that approximately 10% > of Wikimedia UK Chapter are guarantor members. Why?

3 3

Bank account opening requirements
by Andrew Turvey 12 Sep '08

12 Sep '08

Thomas Dalton said: I've just been visiting some banks and some wanted details of all directors, but they only actually wanted ID and whatever from signatories. Others only cared about signatories. > ps. sfaiaa other banks in addition to the Co-operative Bank plc were > approached; I just don't know which. The Coop happens to have a specific > account for community organisations thus were the preferred option. Most of the banks I spoke to had a dedicated community or charity account (Nationwide and Abbey only had savings accounts for them, I assume we want a full current account?). I spoke to HSBC, Barclays, Lloyds and Natwest, all said much the same things (I have leaflets and packs and forms and things .... ======== This is a great bit of research which would be very useful to have to hand when the Board comes to deciding on account openings. Many thanks for doing this! Would if be possible to type the details onto the wiki or alternatively email or post it to me and I can do it? Andrew

2 1

CRB checks
by Andrew Turvey 12 Sep '08

12 Sep '08

Thanks everyone for their contributions - you certainly learn a lot getting involved in things like this! I'm glad in a way I've forced the issue - even if I'm probably making more of it than I should! I realise there is a proposal that Wikimedia UK gets involved in schools educations projects where people go into schools and talk about what we do. Clearly that will involve regular contact with children. My cursory reading of CRB legal advice would draw me to the conclusion that the Board would be legally obliged to ensure that anyone involved in this - whether or not they were members of the Board - were appropriately checked and passed those checks. Clearly if someone refused, they could not be allowed to participate in these projects - but I see no reason why they should be forced off the Board - particularly the initial Board whose focus will be elsewhere. The second issue is regarding junior members. Clearly we are inviting membership applications from all age groups - indeed there is a 17 year old participating in the email list (welcome by the way!). I am a little bit concerned that the person responsible for processing membership applications and recording details will end up with names, addresses, contact details and possibly more for children. I'm not sure it would be responsible - even if it were technically legal - giving someone access to this information who is potentially a risk to children. For that reason I'm inclined to the conclusion that we probably should require the membership secretary (or whatever office ends up doing this job) to be CRBed. If the person refused or failed they should also be relieved of the office - but not kicked off the Board. Having said that, I can't see why the entire board would get involved in every application - perhaps the odd contentious one if the application is refused - or even having access to this information. So again, I don't see why this should require every Board member to agree to a CRB. The third issue is regarding junior Board members. We have sidestepped this issue at the moment by requiring all candidates to be above 18 but under Company law we could actually accept 16 and 17 year olds as directors. The Charity Commission may have issues if the entire Board is 16 but I'm not sure that's likely! As I've said, it's not an issue at the moment but I don't know if it would be in the future if this policy changed. All of these issues are details of a CRB policy which ultimately needs to be agreed by the Board in consultation with the community. I don't think any of them are grounds for forcing all Board candidates to agree to a CRB before they are even elected. On a side issue, if everyone agrees with me on the second issue - needing to CRB the membership secretary - we may need to change the timetable and possibly push back the AGM for a month, because we wont be able to accept membership applications until after the CRB is received back. Andrew Turvey

9 16

KYC requirements
by Andrew Turvey 12 Sep '08

12 Sep '08

>> Do you have a feel for which of these banks will expect, and to what degree? As someone that lives in two places (parent's home and rented accommodation) and has bills at the latter, and is a postgraduate student (i.e. on the fuzzy line between student and employee), but meets the other two points, I'm wondering if I fall between too many lines to be useful on the initial board. Mike Peel === I've just opened a business bank account with HSBC and this is what they asked for: One document from List A (Confirmation of Name): - HMRC Tax notification - e.g. PAYE Notice of Coding, WFTC notice, Children's Tax Credit notice (not P45/P60) - Bank or Building Society statement for your personal account dated within the last 6 months and showing receipt of salary and payment of utility bills - online statements are not acceptable - Construction Industry photot registration card Alternatively bring your Valid UK Passport, Full UK Photo Driving License or Nationali ID card to a branch. plus: One Document from List B (Confirmation of Address) - HMRC Tax notification - e.g. PAYE Notice of Coding, WFTC notice, Children's Tax Credit notice (not P45/P60) - Utility/Council Tax bill dated within the last 6 months - Credit card statement within last 6 months (not online) - Mortgage statement within 12 months (not online) - Motor insurance certificate (unexpired not cover note) - Rent Card or Rent Book (council / RHA not private landlord) This gives you an idea. Each bank's list seems to be slightly different but they all ask for one thing proving name (normally includes passport / driving license) and one thing proving address (normally includes utility bill) Note that banks will not necessarily need this info for all five trustees - sometimes just the main officers will do. Regards, Andrew Turvey Director Andrew Turvey Solutions Limited Registered Office: 23 Cartwright Way, Beeston, Nottingham NG9 1RL Registered in England, Registration Number 5596974 Information contained in this email may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately and delete this email from your system. Unauthorised copying, forwarding or other use of any confidential information in this email may result in legal action.

7 10

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Board Of Directors
by Owen Blacker 12 Sep '08

12 Sep '08

I was just about to say the exact same thing. I'm a director of a non-profit, trustee of a registered charity and a signatory to the bank account me a third group. In none of these organisations is every board member a signatory to the bank account. It's simply not a problem for WMUK to have directors under 18, they just won't necessarily be able to be signatories... On 9/12/08, Gordon Joly <gordon.joly(a)pobox.com> wrote: > At 13:17 +0000 11/9/08, joseph seddon wrote: >> > >> Alison I have just spoken to my next door neighbours daughter >>who works in a bank and >she says that there are special exceptions. >>> > >>> > Problem is triggering them. In most cases you need some kind of hold >>> > over the bank such as having a large existing deposit you can threaten >>> > to withdraw. For something like WMUK 2.0 saying no is the easy option >>> > so they are going to do that unless you are a complete walk through in >>> > terms of meeting requirements. >>> >>> It strikes me that the first and most pressing objective of the board >>> should be to obtain charitable status, for which, as we have seen so >>> clearly, a bank account is necessary. Accepting directors aged under >>> 18 (and therefore without credit ratings) seems likely to place >>> additional obstacles in the path towards charitable status. >>> >>> I agree that having directors of 16 or 17 would be a "nice to have". >>> I don't think it's important enough to compromise the most important >>> aim of the project. >>> >> >>I would have to agree with Sam Korn. What i would suggest is this. Firstly >>have people over 18 year olds, and that meet all requirements get the bank >>account. Then after everything is dealt with, we can then look towards >>having 16 and 17 year old directors in the future. I do feel that it >>is in the best >>interests of WMUK not to have 16/17 year old directors at this time. We >> have >>enough problems to deal with at this moment in time as an >>unfortunate result of >>the way UK banking works, we don't need to add to those difficulties. I >> hope >>you understand this :) >> >>Seddon >> > > > Do all board directors have to be signatories to the bank account? > > I thought that the standard "two from three" signatories was all that > was required... > > Gordo > > -- > "Think Feynman"///////// > http://pobox.com/~gordo/ > gordon.joly(a)pobox.com/// > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > -- Sent from Google Mail for mobile | mobile.google.com -- Owen Blacker, London GB Say no to ID cards: www.no2id.net Get your mits off my bits: www.openrightsgroup.org Help us crowdsourcing video: www.theyworkforyou.com/video -- Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759

2 1

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Refusing CRB check
by Sarah McCulloch 12 Sep '08

12 Sep '08

I was CRB checked a year ago because I supported disabled students, which makes sense (even though I had the full on Enhanced check and all it does is check to see what the police have on you - Name changes and or careful law-breaking never turns up...). As I indicated before, CRB checking a bunch of bureaucrats seemed both expensive and time-wasting. If board members were going to take up going into schools and doing workshops, I could understand it, but the interim board seems to be dedicated to mostly form filling. 2008/9/10 Gordon Joly <gordon.joly(a)pobox.com> > I was CRB checked a few years for some freelance work I did with > homeless people. Working with directly children *and* vulnerable > people requires checks. > > Gordo > > -- > "Think Feynman"///////// > http://pobox.com/~gordo/ <http://pobox.com/%7Egordo/> > gordon.joly(a)pobox.com/// > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > -- "But I, being poor, have only my dreams; I have spread my dreams under your feet; Tread softly because you tread on my dreams." -WB Yeats

17 54

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] U18 Directors
by Christopher Wood (Student) 12 Sep '08

12 Sep '08

Hi Andrew sorry for not getting back as quickly as possible it just the fact that I was in bed when this email was sent. Anyway yes I agree with what Alison has said and take that on board. I would like to say that if the Board decides that I am able to sit on the board under 18 then I am happy but if they feel that I should be 18 then I also accept that. I will still continue to be involved but from the backseat so to speak. Chris ________________________________ From: wikimediauk-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikimediauk-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Turvey Sent: 11 September 2008 21:48 To: wikimediauk-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimediauk-l] U18 Directors To Chris Wood - Great to know that you're keen to get involved and I agree with others that we should try to be as inclusive as possible. With only two days to go until close of nominations, I think it's too late to change this rule - that has already been agreed by consensus - that only 18+s can be candidates for the initial board. However, one of the first things the new Board will do is draft the rules of the chapter - its Memorandum and Article of Association - which i guess will include details of the voting system for members of the subsequent Boards - so please do input there. I personally hope we can come up with a situation which allows 16-18s to be members of the Board but also satisfies the Charities Commission. As you already mentioned, the legal restriction is that Limited Company Directors have to be 16+ but the Charities Commission also has the power to intervene if they fear "mismanagement" of the charity. I've put more details up at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK_v2.0/Candidate_FAQs#Why_do_B oard_candidates_have_to_be_over_18.3F There is nothing to prevent you from putting your name up on the list, but the election committee will probably decide to invalidate your candidacy. While we're on that subject I presume that everyone is happy for - geni, Andrew Whitworth and Jo Seddon - to be the election committee. In that case, I'll put details up on the wiki. Also, is it the consensus that we drop the 50% rule? As to guarantor members, I am not aware of any legal restriction on the age of members. I can't think of any reason we would want to restrict it to over 18s, but I guess this is a decision for the inital Board in consultation with the community. Alison made an interesting point about it being a good idea if all intial Board members had lived in the same place for three years, weren't private renters, had bills in their own name, were in full time employement, had no CCJs and were UK passport holders. I wouldn't want any of these to be a requirement for someone to be a Board member and I don't think it would be fair to introduce this at this stage, but I've added it as a "voluntary question" here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK_v2.0/Candidate_questions as it might be useful for voters. Finally, someone mentioned it wouldnt' be a problem if a person who was a potential risk to children got hold of a U16's address because it would be their parent's address. My though was, they may also be able to get their phone number, email address, IRC contact, facebook/myspace page etc etc - you'd be surprised how much information is readily available. That's the issue I think we should be careful of. Andrew Turvey

1 0

U18 Directors
by Andrew Turvey 11 Sep '08

11 Sep '08

To Chris Wood - Great to know that you're keen to get involved and I agree with others that we should try to be as inclusive as possible. With only two days to go until close of nominations, I think it's too late to change this rule - that has already been agreed by consensus - that only 18+s can be candidates for the initial board. However, one of the first things the new Board will do is draft the rules of the chapter - its Memorandum and Article of Association - which i guess will include details of the voting system for members of the subsequent Boards - so please do input there. I personally hope we can come up with a situation which allows 16-18s to be members of the Board but also satisfies the Charities Commission. As you already mentioned, the legal restriction is that Limited Company Directors have to be 16+ but the Charities Commission also has the power to intervene if they fear "mismanagement" of the charity. I've put more details up at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK_v2.0/Candidate_FAQs#Why_do_Boar… There is nothing to prevent you from putting your name up on the list, but the election committee will probably decide to invalidate your candidacy. While we're on that subject I presume that everyone is happy for - geni, Andrew Whitworth and Jo Seddon - to be the election committee. In that case, I'll put details up on the wiki. Also, is it the consensus that we drop the 50% rule? As to guarantor members, I am not aware of any legal restriction on the age of members. I can't think of any reason we would want to restrict it to over 18s, but I guess this is a decision for the inital Board in consultation with the community. Alison made an interesting point about it being a good idea if all intial Board members had lived in the same place for three years, weren't private renters, had bills in their own name, were in full time employement, had no CCJs and were UK passport holders. I wouldn't want any of these to be a requirement for someone to be a Board member and I don't think it would be fair to introduce this at this stage, but I've added it as a "voluntary question" here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK_v2.0/Candidate_questions as it might be useful for voters. Finally, someone mentioned it wouldnt' be a problem if a person who was a potential risk to children got hold of a U16's address because it would be their parent's address. My though was, they may also be able to get their phone number, email address, IRC contact, facebook/myspace page etc etc - you'd be surprised how much information is readily available. That's the issue I think we should be careful of. Andrew Turvey

8 16

Signpost article
by Andrew Turvey 11 Sep '08

11 Sep '08

For those that haven't seen it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2008-09-08/Wikime… Wikimedia UK disbands, but may form again By Ral315, 8 September 2008 On Thursday, August 28, Wikimedia UK Chair Alison Wheeler announced the dissolution of Wiki Educational Resources, Ltd. (the legal name of Wikimedia's UK chapter), citing problems with respect to their relationship with the Wikimedia Foundation, and issues with the UK banking system, which had made the institution unable to set up necessary bank accounts. Concerns over Wiki Educational Resources (WER) were brought up in an August 13 e-mail to the WikimediaUK-l mailing list by Delphine Ménard, the Chapters Coordinator of the Wikimedia Foundation. In it, Ménard expressed concern over the delays in getting the organization off the ground, as well as an apparent lack of activity within the chapter, beyond a few core members: I must say that as we watch all other chapters develop, all at their own pace, but definitely towards active and fruitful organisations, the Wikimedia Foundation is growing a bit concerned about the lack of development of Wikimedia UK. Although no-one in the Foundation is versed in UK law, and although we are sympathetic to all the problems that have been strewn on Wikimedia UK's way, we believe that it is time to really make things happen and push Wikimedia UK forward. ... At this stage, not having a functional Chapter in the UK is a fact that deprives the Wikimedia projects from a very important potential source of support, both financial and in various activities and partnerships. It is not a situation that we can allow to go on for another two years. ... Note that in the case that this "extended" AGM does not happen and/or does not come up with real proposals for solutions, the Wikimedia Foundation will have to reassess the status of WER in its current state as official Wikimedia Chapter, notably to be consistent with the chapters requirements and guidelines, which demand that chapters are supported by a group of active members of the community and not just 4 or 5. Discussion followed, and some users began to submit applications for membership to the chapter, planning for the AGM. However, Wheeler decided to disband the organization after some thought, and after the immediate resignation of Director and Secretary Arkady Rose. She announced the decision in a post to the list: As I had previously noted I was not planning on remaining a Director post the AGM and this change in your status now, rather than at the AGM when you [Arkady] had indicated to the Board that you also would not seek re-election, means that I must consider carefully what is in the best interests of both Wiki Educational Resources Ltd and of the future operations of Wikimedia UK. Since WMUK was founded we have had one problem after another, some with respect to the relationship with WMF, some with the closer to home UK banking system that insists on basing judgements about a Corporation on the personal details of the members of its Board. One delayed us a year, the other all the way until now and with no immediate sight of a resolution. To date, Wiki Educational Resources Ltd has received little external monies and these have been paid towards the expenses incurred in setting up the Company and carrying out its proper activities. Monies are still owed to various individuals however the Company has no assets to cover them and is, presently, unlikely to have a suitable income stream in the near future to do so. I have been considering for some time what the best option for the future of WMUK is and, regrettably, I feel that Wiki Educational Resources Ltd, being the present holder of a contract with Wikimedia Foundation Inc for the use of the relevant trademarks, is not likely to be the best long-term holder of that contract in the current situation. As such, I am proposing with immediate effect that Wiki Educational Resources Ltd be wound up in accordance with Article 8 of the Memorandum of Association and an EGM will be called to that end. The contract with the Wikimedia Foundation Inc will thus fall aside (it is not transferable) and there are not other assets or benefits to distributed or passed on to other organisations. ... Any applications received for membership are hereby declined. Thank you for your interest. In the wake of its dissolution, many UK-based community members suggested starting the organization anew. A proposal, Wikimedia UK v2.0, has been made on the Meta-Wiki, setting a timetable for its reorganization and soliciting users to run for an initial board. As of press time, 10 candidates had volunteered for membership on the board. Discussion on the structure of the new organization continues on the mailing list, and on the Wikimedia UK v2.0 talk page. Andrew Turvey Director Andrew Turvey Solutions Limited Registered Office: 23 Cartwright Way, Beeston, Nottingham NG9 1RL Registered in England, Registration Number 5596974 Information contained in this email may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately and delete this email from your system. Unauthorised copying, forwarding or other use of any confidential information in this email may result in legal action.

1 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

Wikimediauk-l September 2008