So,

I was away yesterday and am just coming back to this. 

Can I nudge the discussion back to where it started - are we comfortable with the proposals for how we could describe the reasons why different sets of people (broadly: editors v non editors) would benefit/enjoy being members, AND how we might share these messages appropriately around our events? 

I found Fabian's point interesting re: "As long as there are enough people to maintain WMUK, why do we need to
worry about recruitment? And if there are not enough people, then perhaps there is no need for WMUK?" and linking this to broader movement goals. However, we're not just a chapter, we're a charity, and we have public benefit as a part of that charity's objects. Further, the movement itself has expressed the desire to increase the reach of the projects coverage and participation in content creation. 

Increasing membership is a valid goal for this organisation because it delivers in all these ways - supporting established editors to network, set the strategy for the charity and receive micro grants, and drawing in new editors from a broader range of perspectives and backgrounds to widen and strengthen the established editing community.

Increasing membership isn't contradictory but complementary to the movements broadest and most dearly held goals because it facilitates this. So I'd really appreciate input into and support for this work because I think it will succeed if we all work on it, including constrictive criticism of course :)


Katherine Bavage 
Fundraising Manager 
Wikimedia UK
+44 20 7065 0752

Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).

Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.



On 1 July 2013 18:46, Katie Chan <ktc@ktchan.info> wrote:
On 01/07/2013 10:18, James Farrar wrote:
The total number of votes can be inferred as the resolutions were voted on by the same people who participated in the Board election, so 44.

Overall yes, but not exactly. I can think of a few (e.g. me) that voted for the resolutions but not in the board election.


KTC

--
Katie Chan
Any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the view of any organisation the author is associated with or employed by.


Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
     - Heinrich Heine


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org