[Foundation-l] Board resolutions (chapters)

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Without the five persons that make the difference, there is no chapter
anyway.

Andrew, the NYC does not need my approval but given what I know of their
activities so far, they are doing great. This does however not mean that the
issues that are raised have been answered, far from it.

Your realisation that several national chapters have not been performing as
they should is correct. It is however not the issue that we are discussing.
At the same time Ting indicated that the board takes this seriously and this
gives me hope that non performance is not without consequence.
Thanks,
     GerardM

2009/1/20 Andrew Whitworth <wknight8111 at gmail.com>

> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Gerard Meijssen
> <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > When the right five friends come together, they do not need their dog to
> > make a successful organisation. Five people are enough to make a bored,
> five
> > people are enough to raise money. It takes dedication and a lot of
> effort.
>
> 5 people is not critical mass, and I cannot imagine that the chapcom
> would approve a potential chapter that has only 5 members. 5 people
> can do many wonderful things, but that does not make them a chapter.
>
> > Ting ruled out the existence of an USA chapter because of the existence
> of
> > the New York chapter. It is equally clear that the WMF organisation does
> not
> > want to fulfill the role of an USA chapter. When Dan asks me and Anthere
> not
> > to use the "sub-chapter" word, he is right in that the board names them a
> > chapter, but the issue of the New York chapter having fewer abilities and
> > responsibilities is conveniently swept under the carpet in this way.
>
> This is all blatantly false. What "abilities" and "responsibilities"
> are not available to WMNYC that our other national-level chapters
> have? Besides the fact that the WMF itself is based on the USA and
> therefore is more able to enter into business agreements with
> companies here then in other countries, I see no limitation on this or
> any other subnational chapter. Do not assume that this group is at any
> disadvantage compared to our other national chapters. In fact, this
> chapter is in BETTER shape then some of our national chapters are,
> having already sponsored a number of outreach projects, creating
> working relationships with other organizations, and soliciting
> high-profile donations from museums and other content repositories. We
> have national chapters that have not had as much activity in the last
> year that WMNYC has had in the last two months.
>
> > The prefix sub indicates that it is less then the norm. For me it is
> obvious
> > that some great five or more people will make the NYC a success. What I
> want
> > to learn is in what way the national concerns that I expect a functional
> > chapter to take care off will be handled for the USA. This is the crucial
> > bit of thinking, information that is missing. And as long as this is not
> > clear, the NYC is a sub-par to me.
>
> WMNYC does not need to impress you, and does not need your approval
> Gerard. Their success will be measured in volunteers, donation
> dollars, and media contributed to our projects. What "national
> concerns" do you expect that they will not be able to address? Our
> "sub-national" nomenclature indicates only that they are smaller in
> size then the country that contains them, nothing more. If I called
> them a "super-municipal chapter" or a "regional chapter", would your
> opinion of them improve? If I called our current chapters "sub-global"
> or "sub-continental", would that change your opinion of them too?
>
> --Andrew Whitworth
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>