[Wikimedia-l] Are chapters part of the community and board seats for affiliates?

[Balázs Viczián]

Maybe I wasn't clear enough, imo chapters are NOT part of the communities
(nor the global community), just a tool for them to achieve certain goals
that otherwise would be much more difficult or (almost) impossible to reach.

Balázs
2013.02.24. 10:34, "Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton" <rodrigo.argenton at gmail.com>
ezt írta:

> Two things, one is, I do not know why these discussions are not held in a
> Wiki
> ( ie meta), which is easier to document and much easier to follow.
>
> The second point:
>
> I think the chapters are a significant part of the community, however, as
> only
> one part, the chapters can not, should not speak for the whole. Thus,
> it is interesting
> to have people with most varied visions, perhaps because chapter people is
> not interesting some kind of group, but for others from the Movement, that
> affiliation is What they need. More than that, if you only choose people of
> the chapters, you will never have different visions, so you always forced,
> in
> a way, that group fits in your reality, or be like a "European" chapter.
>
>
> observations
>
>
>    - If there is doubt as what's the chapter role in the Movement, how can
>    we know what is a chapter? Why is there so much energy lost in
>    bureaucracies, rather than focusing on activities? Chapters are
> made to perform
>    activities? If yes, so why not prioritize the best local structures for
>    this to occur? If not, why choose people from chapter to decide about
>    other types of groups that only will do activities?
>    - Why AffCom discussions are closed, since you are not the whole
>    community? Why need to be so few people, and so obscure? Why not follow
> the
>    other current processes and make openings for communities?
>    - If a chapter is something that is done to serve the needs of online
>    communities, and people of the chapters make decisions without
> consulting these
>    communities, without discussing the annual planning, or strategic
>    planning with these communities, how can they accomplish what online
>    communities want? And thinking in that, how they will those who is the
>    best group for affiliation for the communities?
>
>
>
> On 23 February 2013 15:48, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I see some fundamental misunderstandings here, which make this discussion
> > so far not so productive and for which I am/was planning a reply...
> > however, in the end I doubt I'd manage to say it better than Anthere:
> > http://article.gmane.org/**gmane.org.wikimedia.**foundation/6652<
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.org.wikimedia.foundation/6652>
> >
> > Nemo
> >
> >
> > ______________________________**_________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.**org <Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton
> rodrigo.argenton at gmail.com
> +55 11 979 718 884
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>