[Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012

[Joan Goma]

> From: Florence Devouard <anthere9 at yahoo.com>
> To: foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
> Message-ID: <jhar77$4kl$1 at dough.gmane.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 2/13/12 8:45 AM, Mathias Damour wrote:
> > Why would both "Associations" and "Affiliates" both need to use
> > Wikimedia marks ?
> > Does OpenStreetMap need it if it gets some grants from the WMF ?
> >
> > I hope that these models won't be used to softly downgrade (or threaten
> > to downgrade) chapters that would be said not having their "bylaws and
> > mission aligned with Wikimedia's".
>
> Very likely. But it is does not really matter actually because this
> decision is a clear sign that Chapters do not really exist anymore
> except on the paper. Chance is that the concept will disappear within
> the next couple of year, simply because it will become a concept
> redondant with partner organizations.
>
> I think you (and many other people expressing concerns about those new
models) are too optimistic about them and too pessimistic about Chapters. I
wish we had a lot of problems because there where lots of people wiling to
join new chapters ans new models. I would be extremely happy to help
unfolding that kind of mess.


> But my immediate concern is that.... hummm.... I fail to really see the
> difference between the 4 cases. Could we have some examples of each to
> better see what the difference is ?
>

I think nobody can give examples because there are not cases yet. But from
my participation in movement roles group I understand that the differences
come from 3 parameters:

a)Registered organizations / Informal groups
b)Geography focused / Non geography focused
c)Their main goal is Wikimedia Projects / They have other goals that
benefit us.

Then the classification comes like this:

1)Chapters: Registered / Geography / Wikimedia
2)Partner Organizations: Registered / Non Geography / Wikimedia
3)Associations: Informal / Geography or not / Wikimedia
4)Affiliated: Registered / Geography or not / Other

So in Associations we can have Chapters to be and Partner Organizations to
be. And some may be Associations for ever not reaching the status of a
registered entity if they don’t feel the need. (Perhaps the term
Association is not the best and something like “Wiki-Group” would be better)



>
> For example, since you mention OpenStreetMap.... would that rather be a
> partner or an affiliate ?
>
> Or, Amical, would that rather be a partner or an affiliate ?
>

Regarding Amical my personal opinion is that they are highly flexible.
First they proposed a transnational chapter operating in 4 countries, later
they sent a mail to the board saying they would have a national chapter for
Andorra, later they proposed a sub-national chapter in Spain. Now probably
they can fit in the Partner Organization model.

You know they are highly thankful to you because you find a place for them
to participate in Wikilovemsonuments.[1] I think Partner Organization can
be a solution for them like when you invented the therm “Local area” They
were not interested in any name nor position in the list their only
interest where participating in Wikilovesmonuments with the same tools and
same freedom than any body else.

They are not interested in any kind of exclusivity, they are not interested
in the name “National Chapter”, their only interest is being able to
support and promote the Catalan projects with the same tools and same
freedom you have to promote French ones.



[1] Before this change there was an edit war with people erasing their
participation because they were not a chapter and others including them.
Then Floence created a place for them and from then everybody was happy:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AWiki_Loves_Monuments_2011&action=historysubmit&diff=49614457&oldid=49607752