When we go past 4-5, how do we fairly determine which US chapters get to keep their votes and which don't get one? Also, what reason do other nation's chapters have to trust we'll simply give up votes down the road when we have more chapters? Providing a solution now seems a good way to ease concerns and decrease resistance to future US chapters. 

Plus, are we really worried that the US is going to lose our clout in WM or WMF?

-Greg

____________
Sent from my iPhone. Apologies for any typos. A more detailed response may be sent later.

On Jul 15, 2012, at 12:08 AM, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin@wikimediadc.org> wrote:

Granted; and, to be honest, were we really going to have 50 chapters, I'd agree with you.

However, it's important to note that the idea of state-level chapters is completely theoretical at this point.  At least for the foreseeable future, we will only have a handful of regional chapters -- perhaps 4 or 5 by 2014.  It doesn't strike me as unreasonable to allow these to hold the same rights that other chapters have -- particularly as they'll be held to all the same obligations in any case.

Cheers,
Kirill

--
Kirill Lokshin
Secretary | Wikimedia District of Columbia
http://wikimediadc.org | @wikimediadc

On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 12:01 AM, Damian Finol <damian@wikimedia.org.ve> wrote:
There's a difference between voice and votes. US Chapters can participate in meetings, committees, etc. However, when it comes to chapters voting on for example Chapter selected board seats the possibility that the US could potentially have 50 votes is very unfair/scary/overwhelming

Damian


On Saturday, July 14, 2012, Kirill Lokshin wrote:
The idea that all US chapters would have only a single voice in movement-wide discussions.  This hasn't been demanded except by tiny minority among other chapters -- and certainly not by anyone who will actually be involved in recognizing future US chapters.

As far as I'm concerned, that element makes this proposal a total non-starter.

Cheers,
Kirill

--
Kirill Lokshin
Secretary | Wikimedia District of Columbia
http://wikimediadc.org | @wikimediadc

On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 11:51 PM, Mr. Gregory Varnum <gregory.varnum@gmail.com> wrote:
Which political concessions are you referring to?


-Greg

____________
Sent from my iPhone. Apologies for any typos. A more detailed response may be sent later.

On Jul 14, 2012, at 11:49 PM, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin@wikimediadc.org> wrote:

It's entirely unclear to me why we're proposing to make such dramatic political concessions, particularly given the lack of any meaningful external pressure to do so.

Cheers,
Kirill

--
Kirill Lokshin
Secretary | Wikimedia District of Columbia
http://wikimediadc.org | @wikimediadc

On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Kevin Rutherford <Ktr101@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hey Everyone,
 
I hope that you have all been doing well and those who attended Wikimania have not been partying too hard after the awesome experiences of the last few days. I wanted to let you all know, that per a WALRUS meet-up discussion tonight, myself and two other users have drafted up a plan on the evolution and governance of future Wikimedia chapters: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal_for_the_evolution_of_Wikimedia_chapters_in_the_United_States 
 
We look forward to your opinion on it, and I hope that those who are in the D.C. region have safe trips back, over the next few days.

Sincerely,
 
Kevin Rutherford
Ktr101

_______________________________________________
Wikimediaus-l mailing list
Wikimediaus-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaus-l



_______________________________________________
Wikimediaus-l mailing list
Wikimediaus-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaus-l


_______________________________________________
Wikimediaus-l mailing list
Wikimediaus-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaus-l