[Wikimediaau-l] Chapters purpose and relationship (was: Re: Melbourne meetup report)

Wed Oct 17 00:20:22 UTC 2007

I agree with this. Whether these are official or unofficial is something we
need to look at when the need arises.

On 10/12/07, Gnangarra <gnangarra at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Sorry my poor wording there, they shouldn't be separate entities but sub
> branches of the one entity WMA, purely as away of overcoming the issues of
> distances.
>
>
> On 12/10/2007, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 12/10/2007, Gnangarra <gnangarra at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Its a good idea to have individual chapters
> > >
> > > The way I thought we are working is to create WMA first, then WMA
> > helps the
> > > states create chapters during 2008, once created the states would have
> > a
> > > representative on the WMA committee, realising that not every state is
> > going
> > > to have the critical mass to support a local chapter initially anyway.
> >
> >
> > I was going to say that I think WMF expect max one chapter per nation
> > state, then I remembered about the recent American Pennsylvania
> > chapter talk. So is it one chapter per legal jurisdiction?
> >
> > I am not sure that I think multiple legal entity chapters within
> > Australia would be a great idea. What with the small population. I
> > would prefer formal state structures within a single legal entity
> > being Wikimedia Australia, I think. The European chapters for example
> > have one per nation despite larger populations than us. I am not too
> > convinced that the distance necessitates separate legal entities.
> >
> > On a related note,
> > For those who missed it, Florence recently reported on foundation-l
> > about the recent Board meeting. Her email is here:
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.org.wikimedia.foundation/20666
> >
> > Specifically:
> >
> > >>
> > Sue Gardner began the
> > discussion by presenting a possible strategy to clarify the relationship
> >
> > between WMF and Wikimedia Chapters. The strategy outlines 4 types of
> > relationships, essentially ranging from business development with
> > revenue sharing over traditional non-profit activities to informal
> > affilitations.
> > Far ranging discussion resulted, hmmm, with obvious agreement resulting.
> > (...) We also agreed on the
> > need for a systematic process of gathering feedback from the chapters on
> > their expectations & perceived purpose should precede a strategy draft
> > from WMF about the relationship with chapters.
> > <<
> >
> > So, we are not a chapter, and they won't be getting feedback from us
> > :) but it is worth thinking about anyway.
> >
> > To me the purpose of a chapter, as in creating and maintaing a local
> > legal entity, is mainly two-fold, or maybe they are in fact the same
> > fold:
> > 1) To gain the benefits from official/formal legal status within
> > Australia. This includes potentially access to grants and funding,
> > charity status to make donations (to us?) in AU$ tax deductible,
> > potential partnerships with Australian groups such as universities.
> > Also, greater respect and visibility.
> > 2) To encourage and enable face to face meetings of Wikimedians on a
> > greater scale than local meetups. Although this is sometimes derided
> > as merely "throwing parties" I think it is much more powerful than
> > that. Connections made or cemented face to face are much stronger than
> > those only through email or wiki. That goes for connections within the
> > group of  Wikimedians and also between non-Wikimedians and "friends
> > and allies" such as free software people, free content people,
> > education people. Such meetings can boost everyone's enthusiasm and
> > motivation and also spread disparate knowledge quickly and effectively
> > over short, sharp bursts.
> >
> > Some other ideas...
> > 3) (probably should be 0) To carry out the WMF's vision and mission
> > within Australian territory and within an Australian context. This
> > could mean Wikibooks(Wikiversity) adapted to Australian (ahem state)
> > curricula. It could mean Wikisource special topics on historical
> > Australian documents. It could also mean specialised DVDs or books
> > being produced and distributed, collecting (eg) Wikipedia articles on
> > Australian topics. [I personally would be delighted to see a disc of
> > Spoken Wikipedia as recorded by Australians... there are a few Aussies
> > who have done them and they are delightful to listen to.] It could
> > also mean talking to educators or students about a) how to use
> > Wikimedia resources effectively and b) the benefits of using wikis and
> > c) The benefits of using free licenses (creating free content).
> >
> > 4) To lobby the Australian government for reduced application of
> > copyright on Australian government-created works. To lobby Australian
> > public archives and collections for greater access to works in their
> > collections especially public domain works and digital access.
> >
> > This point is my hobby-horse and also the most different from how WMF
> > acts in the US today so likely the most controversial.
> > However... through Wikimedia I have become aware of how we, the Aus
> > public, are unnecessarily dudded and deprived of works that are owned
> > by us (or by no one), collected for us, created by us, and yet somehow
> > are not recognised as belong to us.
> >
> > Why did I become aware of this? Because the US has an amazing attitude:
> >
> > http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000105----000-.html
> > that greatly benefits Americans... that greatly benefits Wikimedia...
> > that greatly benefits the whole world.
> >
> > The US appears to be a world leader in this regard. Europe's space
> > agency the ESA is stupid and releases their images under a
> > non-commercial license. I will sincerely celebrate the day that
> > Wikimedian lobbying helps to overturn this.
> >
> > Those of us who have used state libraries' or museums' online
> > collections will be aware that they frequently claim to have
> > reproduction or other rights on public domain material. This is wrong
> > and misleading... instead of acting as caretakers on our behalf they
> > frequently act as  scolding nannies wrapping us on the knuckles for
> > daring to touch. So a related effort would be lobbying for greater
> > funding for digitisation of all kinds of archives.
> >
> > 5) To lobby and promote the use of free licenses in academia.
> > The amount of information locked away in subscription-only journals is
> > nothing short of scandalous...education, via access to information, is
> > nothing short of revolutionary. What is the point of academia if not
> > to ultimately increase the public good. If so, it should be available
> > to the public.
> >
> > I am not totally sold on the use of free licenses in, say, personal
> > art and photography. Things created by private citizens. But in the
> > case of academia, science, education, government, and *works that are
> > already free* due to copyright expiration, it is nothing short of
> > outrageous to make things expensive and difficult to access.
> >
> > Again this point is more removed from what WMF does in the US, but I
> > think it has pretty clear links to the WMF vision.
> >
> > So that's my thoughts about it.
> >
> > cheers,
> > Brianna
> >
> > --
> > They've just been waiting in a mountain for the right moment:
> > http://modernthings.org/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> > Wikimediaau-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> Wikimediaau-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaau-l/attachments/20071017/76f11ec4/attachment.htm 