One of the problems we have is that the US is much larger than most other countries with national chapters, and we are probably going to need to consider establishing regional subchapters. I do not believe that having 50 state subchapters is worth doing, at least not until we get really big. Initially we probably should have somewhere between 3 and 15 chapters, depending on interest levels, and be prepared to split chapters as need be. It would be highly useful for us to get demographics on where our "interested editors" are so as to better plan the structure of a US chapter.
Even if we don't initially create subchapters (and we might not) we should write into our bylaws the ability to create, split, merge, and dissolve them, because it will come up.
Kelly
Texas still reserves the right to split itself into five other states (but not the right to secede, contrary to popular belief); yet, non-profit organizations really can't organize themselves that way. Even a national chapter has to be incorporated in one state or the other.
I'll say again that a practical solution I favor mirrors the organization of the WGA, with incorporated entities representing those either West of the Mississippi or East. It's a practical compromise given those who want state chapters (which isn't going to happen anytime soon, I'll state for the record now) and those who want a single, national organization (which would be difficult to manage). In the future, I'd rather subdivide further than go the other way, but I also don't want to divide our efforts, given how long it's taken us to get even this far.
Austin
Kelly Martin wrote:
One of the problems we have is that the US is much larger than most other countries with national chapters, and we are probably going to need to consider establishing regional subchapters. I do not believe that having 50 state subchapters is worth doing, at least not until we get really big. Initially we probably should have somewhere between 3 and 15 chapters, depending on interest levels, and be prepared to split chapters as need be. It would be highly useful for us to get demographics on where our "interested editors" are so as to better plan the structure of a US chapter.
Even if we don't initially create subchapters (and we might not) we should write into our bylaws the ability to create, split, merge, and dissolve them, because it will come up.
Kelly
Honestly, I think one of the big problems facing the creation of "Wikimedia USA" is a percieved lack of benefits and lack of purpose for such an organization compared to similar organizations in other countries. The most compelling reason seems to be local fundrasing and local server hosting, both of which are dealt with fairly well by the main Wikimedia Foundation. While I can offer some reasons to want to organize on a more local level within the USA, the effort to create such a group seems to be much better spent on simply developing the Wikimedia projects themselves instead.
Mind you, this is not a criticism of those who want to establish Wikimedia-USA, but something that must be overcome and justified in an attempt to put together a U.S. chapter. Rather than trying to come up with the structure of how the organization would be put together, you must establish the need for such an organization in the first place. This is more than simply a "mission statement", but you must come up with a "killer app" (to use computer industry jargon) or the one thing that is so compelling to establish Wikimedia-USA that its purpose far outstrips any other reason to put the group together. So far I havn't seen that.
If all we are doing is organizing a group of people for the sake of being able to get together and throw parties and do live one-on-one chats, you don't have the compelling reason to get this put together. Yes, there are some "local" projects that can be improved considerably like updating local information pages on Wikipedia, but that isn't a "killer app". A local host for Wikimainia efforts is very borderline as rationale for putting together such a group, although this is certainly something that should be done if it is established.
Keep in mind that you must ask for almost all activities like this, what is something that Wikimedia USA can do, and can do very well, but the Wikimedia Foundation simply won't or can't do? If you can answer that question, the rest of this will fall into place, including state/regional organizations (or if those are even necessary). I will admit there are some activities that the WMF does that could be "delegated" to Wikimedia USA, but again that doesn't make a compelling reason to justifiy having it established in the first place.
The chief responsibility of a Wikimedia chapter is to promote and pursue Wikimedia interests specific to its country, and as a practical matter often its entire region. This includes mobilizing local members of the community, but also a multitude of other projects that simply aren't within the scope of the Foundation.
The latest report of Wikimedia Serbia's activities came through my inbox yesterday, and it's amazing how many unforeseeable things come up. They handle them all, however, and so far quite well. The eclecticism of an organization such as this makes it difficult to define a specific scope here and now, but let me address your points in particular:
"Fundraising" in a chapter context means several things:
* The solicitation of grants and sponsorships in chapters' respective countries * The collection of money to maintain their organization and fund their own initiatives * Proxy solicitation on behalf of the Foundation, a tricky legal issue
Managing donations for the Wikimedia projects will always be the purview of the Wikimedia Foundation.
It's true that one of the traditional roles of a local chapter, liaising with local organizations and government entities, is a role currently handled by the Foundation, and one an American chapter needn't and perhaps shouldn't replace (or even become involved in). It's not an all-or-nothing issue, however.
Local hosting isn't a chapter matter, except perhaps for facilitating donations of hardware and/or rackspace. Currently, all such donations are agreements with the Wikimedia Foundation itself, managed by the Wikimedia server admin staff. This could change in the future, but it's hardly the killer app for any chapter.
Austin
'Twas brillig Sunday 09 July 2006 11:15 pm, when Kelly Martin scrobe:
One of the problems we have is that the US is much larger than most other countries with national chapters, and we are probably going to need to consider establishing regional subchapters.
My first thought on this was to start with the various WikiProjects for states (I'm active with WikiProject Wisconsin, for example). It seems reasonable for smaller and mid-sized states to arrange quarterly or semiannual Meetups within the state (larger states like Texas or California may have trouble organizing such events for everyone in the project to attend).
Reading further, it seems we might be able to organize annual regional Meetups based on, perhaps, [[en:Template:U.S.Regions]]...
For comparison, I'm also very active in the National Model Railroad Association. That organization holds a national convention at one location in summer (this year's convention just concluded in Philadelphia, next year is in Detroit and 2008 is in Anaheim) and one or two annual conventions for each region located within a city in the region (the Midwest region convention was in Chicago this year and will be in Muncie, Indiana, next year). Local divisions (such as the South Central Wisconsin Division, based here in Madison) hold monthly meetings normally September through May.
I think for this organization, national conventions and monthly local meetings are probably out, but we can look somewhat seriously at annual regional meetings. The local organizers can usually get space at a local school on a weekend for cheap (which will often include wireless access); the Madison school district makes its school gyms available on weekend days for as little as $25/day, for example. Our meetings may even be small enough to be privately hosted at someone's home, further reducing the costs.
This is a very Wikipedia-centric viewpoint—in fact, English Wikipedia-centric. Wikimedia chapters operate around countries, not projects or even languages. (The United States has more Internet-connected Spanish speakers than probably any other country, and we could do a lot to help our still-struggling Spanish Wikipedia.)
There are already many WikiProjects and notice boards for American states and regions, but they don't take the place of a chapter (and neither will chapters replace them).
Austin
wikimediaus-l@lists.wikimedia.org