[Foundation-l] A chapters-related question

[Ziko van Dijk]

It seems to me that several kind of groups are talked about in this
same discussion:
* Informal groups, grass root movements, like the Brazilians
* Non-geographical groups like the Blind, but also Latin or Yiddish Wikipedians
* Partners outside the Wikimedia movement, like Bundesarchiv

For the first one, it is difficult to figure something out because a
certain stability is the basis for a more organized kind of
cooperation with the Foundation.
For the second one, I would like to see the possibility to "join" the
Foundation in a similar way the chapters do. Collecting money and
using logos is the key problem for those groups nowadays.
The problem would be to limit the number of possible organizations.
For example, would we find an organization of German speaking
Wikipedians suitable, next to the three chapters in the main German
speaking countries?
The third kind is a very different one, and due to the various ways of
cooperation the cooperation treaties with them would be very
customized.

Kind regards
Ziko



2009/7/6 Michael Snow <wikipedia at verizon.net>:
> Aside from the new chapters, right now the Board of Trustees is looking
> at what kinds of related groups we want to have relationships with.
> (What prompts this directly is the case of Wikimedia Brazil, which was
> approved to become a chapter last year, but whose organizers have since
> decided they did not want to proceed as a formal entity at this time.
> However, I want to ask about the general principle, not the specific
> case.) The basic question is, what can or should we do to encourage
> grassroots groups that want to support our mission, but may not fit into
> the chapters framework?
>
> There are various possibilities here. One example is interest groups
> that aren't tied to geography, the way the chapters are. I always cite
> the idea of an Association of Blind Wikipedians, who might wish to
> organize to promote work on accessibility issues. As with the Brazilian
> situation, informal groups could also fit local conditions better
> sometimes, or serve as a proto-chapter stage of development. Maybe
> there's a benefit in having an association with some durability and
> continuation, but without going to the effort of incorporation and
> formal agreements on trademarks and such. It could also make sense to
> have an organization form for a specific project and then disband after
> it is completed, such as with Wikimania (somebody can correct me if I'm
> wrong, but I understand the Gdansk team is planning something like this
> as distinct from Wikimedia Polska).
>
> Anyway, I would like to invite ideas and discussion on this. Is this
> something we should do? What kinds of models are people interested in?
> How should we appropriately recognize and work with volunteer-organized
> groups? And in all of this, how would we make it both distinct from and
> compatible with the current structure of chapter organizations?
>
> --Michael Snow
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



-- 
Ziko van Dijk
NL-Silvolde