[Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012

[Florence Devouard]

On 2/13/12 12:51 PM, Bishakha Datta wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Florence Devouard<anthere9 at yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>>
>> One benefit I can identify from this decision is that we could push
>> forward that
>> * partner organizations are ONLY recognized by Wikimedia Foundation
>> * whilst chapters could finally push forward the idea that a new chapter
>> has to be recognized by the network of chapter + WMF rather than WMF only.
>> In short, a chapter could be an element of a network whilst a partner will
>> be only a WMF partner and not necessarily accepted by the network of
>> chapters.
>>
>>
> I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. How would this benefit
> the movement?
>
> Best
> Bishakha
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


I take it you are aware that each chapter developped over time its own 
set of "partners" (similar-minded organizations that have overlapping 
goals with the chapters). These organizations have developped a specific 
relationship with a chapter. Typically in France, associations will be 
members of each other and make sure to support each other when needed 
(communication, money, technical support).

These partners do not become, by heritage, partners of another chapter 
or WMF.

It seems totally logical and positive that WMF develops on its side a 
similar network of partners, which do not mean that these organizations 
should become mandatorily partners to all chapters. Right ?

In short, this describe a collection of bubbles, some overlapping, 
others not overlapping. This flexibility is good and make sense.

In my view, a chapter should have no obligations toward these other 
organizations. Maybe will it work with them, maybe not. It will depend 
on the focus of the partner and very likely on its geography. But there 
will be no obligations. Relationships will occur based on interest and 
proximity.

On the other hand, I feel that chapters are more closely linked. It is 
my feeling and it may not be everyone feeling :)
But in my view, if a chapter is struggling to start, I feel like others 
chapters do have a sort of duty to help it. If an international meeting 
is organized somewhere, I think chapters will somehow feel a duty to 
help the less wealthy chapters to join because they will feel it is 
important that all chapters be there.
This sense of belonging, of having not only benefits but also 
obligations, can work well when there are 10 chapters. It is already 
stretched when there are 40 chapters. I am not quite sure it will still 
work when there will be 80 chapters. I feel that the feeling of 
belonging to a family, solidarity and the certainty that it makes sense 
to have chapters in most places in the world, would feed on chapters 
somehow having a say in which chapters are actually welcome as chapters. 
I think that a feeling of solidarity and sharing will be facilitated if 
chapters felt more involved in the decision making of who is part and 
who is not part of the network.

One if left with the question of whether it is good for the mouvement 
that chapters have a feeling of solidarity toward one another. Well, I 
do think it will be a benefit to maintain this link of solidarity.

I do not think this would be very hard to achieve. Probably only two 
main points to implement
1) a chapter committee which would be a mix bag of WMF and chapters 
representants (some tweaks)
2) a set of requirement (this is already set up; nothing special to do)
2) a charter that would be commonly agreed by all organizations and 
signed by new chapters (it can very well start very very very simple and 
be improved over time)

Hope that unwrap the head :)

Flo