Thanks everyone for the comments. To respond to three points raised:
On Dec 6, 5:11 pm, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/12/6 AndrewRT andrewrtur...@googlemail.com:
That's pretty much what I've been thinking, although I'm not sure we need it yet. I think we ought to let the members of each branch elect their chair, though (ratified by the board).
I think that's stage 2 - autonomous branches. Where you only have two or three members having a full blown election seems unnecessary, but a "skeleton branch" would be useful because it gives us a way of using the name before moving to a full autonomous branch.
For the constitutionalists among readers, I'd propose we establish the branches through an Article 28 resolution of the Board, ratified by the next AGM.
I disagree. I think Article 3.1 is better suited to it.
Article 3.1 would need permission of the AGM first and I'm not sure it would quite fit. I'm talking about two particular projects that could be started before the AGM.
As for London, although it may be a great branch in terms of running activities - although we already have the London Wikimeet for that - I'm not sure we could do anything as "Wikimedia London" that we couldn't do as "Wikimedia UK". Besides, we didn't actually ask for permission to use "Wikimedia London"!
Andrew