On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 1:01 AM, Bence Damokos bdamokos@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 12:57 AM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
I'm still stuck on "bylaws". Why is AffCom asking for bylaws?
Depends on the context.
We do review them, or at least try to, whenever a group (chapter, user group, thematic organisation) decides to have them, in order to make sure they comply with with the requirements for the given affiliate type and some general best practices. If a user group doesn't have a bylaw, then we are not asking them to create one - in fact, the choice over bylaws was one of the original design points for the user group model.
I'll also add, Risker, for clarity, that User Groups may use Wikimedia trademarks. As such, if the group seeking User Group recognition is a registered association, it makes sense to ask to review their bylaws. Imagine the AAA - "Association for Authors' Attribution" - asking for User Group status. It so happens that their real aim is not "enforce attribution for authorship in free licenses" but "extend copyright for centuries after author's death", it might make sense to actually have a look at their existing bylaws before granting them the right to use Wikimedia's name.
Delphine