[Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust

[Ray Saintonge]

Thank you Liam for using the term, "organisational roles," instead of 
the more pretentious, "movement roles." I find the whole thread 
disturbing. I am and have always been a strong supporter of the autonomy 
of both projects and chapters, and from that vantage point it is 
difficult to see this initiative as leading to anything other than the 
undermining of a chapter.

It is all proceeding in a predictable pattern.  It pits young amateurs 
who have embraced an ideal as a labour of love and who have a naïveté 
about the ways of the world against goal-oriented professionals well 
schooled in the sophisms that produce success. This does not establish 
intent or malice; it's just the way things develop unless someone is 
willing to step away and recognize the process for what it is.

I am an amateur. I am not motivated by dreams of a sinecure or reveries 
of prestige. I don't care if anything that I do becomes a polished 
feature articles. I don't care if the site has a professional appearance 
with consistent format throughout. I am not obsessed by growth, or by 
leading the global south by the hand into salvation. It's nice if that 
can happen, and nicer if they can figure it out for themselves.  My 
bottom line remains a commitment to share the sum of the world's 
knowledge. Not more, not less.

When I hear of things like these Indian developments, I start to get the 
impression that we have lost our way. As much as the organizers may 
deny, it's as plain as day that these two organizations are being set up 
to compete. That alienates people.

Ray

On 11/11/11 11:24 PM, Liam Wyatt wrote:
>
> I understand what you [Bishaka] mean, and agree with the sentiment, but I think the
> "funding question" you're referring to is the practical application of the
> broader issue of "organisational roles".
>
> What I still don't understand, despite the fast and helpful answers from
> both yourself and Hisham (thank you) is the differentiation of the
> organisational roles between the Trust and the Chapter. I had originally
> assumed that the Trust was set up because it provided a legal way for the
> WMF India Team to be a 'branch' organisation of the WMF (not just
> individual contractors). But, from reading the description of the legal
> setup of the Trust, it seems that the Trust is, in fact, legally
> independent. Presumably this means that Hisham and the rest of the team are
> now employees of the Trust and no longer contractors to the WMF directly.
> If that is the case, then presumably the WMF has basically the same amount
> of legal and financial control over the Trust than it has over the Chapter.
> Namely, it provides project funds (one-off or ongoing) and provides
> trademark permission. Both organisations, presumably, also have the right
> to seek funding and undertake projects independently from the WMF so long
> as they meet their organisation's mission.
>
> Therefore... I'm confused about the differentiation of organisational roles
> because it seems we now have two, independent from each other, non-profit
> organisations in India that are both also equally independent from the WMF.
> The only difference, as I understand it from what Bishakha explained
> earlier, is that the Chapter is legally a "Society" (with an elected board
> and members) and the Trust has two appointed trustees.
>
> Is that the case? As a practical question - to make it more concrete and
> less abstract - what can the Trust do that the Chapter cannot? And, if the
> Chapter can legally do all the things that the Trust can do (and the WMF
> has the same amount of control either way), why do we need two
> organisations?
>
>