[Foundation-l] Wikimedia Pennsylvania

[FloNight]

One important point is that people that live in large metro areas need a
formal organization less than people that live in less populated areas. The
people that live in the population hubs have the ability to see and work
with other WikiMedians regularly if they so choose. A more formal
organization is a good mechanism to bring in the folks in less populated
areas. To make them a part of a larger group.

Sydney


On 7/10/07, Casey Brown <cbrown1023 at comcast.net> wrote:
>
> I agree completely.  I have also suggested this in other places.  We would
> just have a "Wikimedia United States" that may or may not be an "official
> organization" but is more of a "Chapters committee" aiming and making its
> business to help out fellow chapters in the United States and get them
> started.  A committee based solely on Chapters in the United States would
> allow us to focus on and learn more about American laws on items such as
> this.
>
> Casey Brown
> Cbrown1023
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org
> [mailto:foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of SJ Klein
> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 3:04 PM
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia Pennsylvania
>
>
> Whether or not this is the right formal structure, it is a good idea
> to help get local wikipedia groups organized, on campuses and at
> coffeehouses; promote local languages; &c.
>
> SJ
>
>
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2007, Dmcdevit wrote:
>
> > That makes sense, but I think it would make more sense to have a
> > national chapter with (an emphasis on) local subchapters, instead of
> > simply scattered metro chapters in the US. The US may be big, but when I
> > fly the length of the country from top to bottom, as I do often
> > (Portland to Phoenix), the only major thing that changes is the
> > temperature. It seems like we're saying the US has the reasons (internal
> > commonality, etc.) for having a chapter, but is too big and/or legally
> > disparate for a single chapter. Why not both? From an administrative
> > perspective, it seems more sensible to organize people on a broader
> > scale first, and then determine the viable subsets, rather than starting
> > small before we know it works. Presumably, a national chapter could
> > still provide useful services for the people in, say, Arizona, who have
> > never even had a meetup and are unlikely to have a chapter in the near
> > future. Most especially, if we are now contemplating many chapters in
> > the US (there are 50 states, and I assume even more metro areas), a
> > national chapter would be a good way to help get those organized, and
> > lend support from other existing (sub)chapters.
> >
> > Dominic
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>