How much it costs to join is a somewhat lesser issue for me than some of the other issues (though as one of the great ranks of the part time workers £12 is a lot more to me now than it was when I was working full time). Almost everything else I've joined as a Wikimedian has been free to join, though there was a registration fee for wikimania, I'm not sure why in principle the UK chapter should be different.
As a fairly active Wikimedian who happens to live in the UK I'm a potential chapter member, but not entirely sold yet as to why I should get involved in a geographically focussed chapter when that doesn't relate to my editing activities. However I have gone through your form, and got as far as realising that unusually for a wikimedia project you want to know my real life identity. Now I understand that I'd have to disclose that if I wanted to be a check user, Arb or boardmember but I don't see why I should disclose that to you. I also am less likely to print out and complete something than I would be to sign up to something online (aside from the fact that my printer is currently hors de combat, I do think snail mail is a deterrent to people who are used to doing stuff online). Sorry if that comes across as negative, and maybe I'm the only one of your prospects with those particular issues. But if you want to increase your membership one way is to ask people like me why they haven't joined. Cheers and happy editing. WereSpielChequers On 18 February 2010 11:32, Charles Matthews <charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote: > Thomas Dalton wrote: >> On 17 February 2010 22:15, Charles Matthews >> <charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote: >> >>> The logic of soliciting donations is always that if there is more money, >>> more can be done. Money doesn't make the world of the WMF go round, but >>> in the real world money tends to be given to those who show they know >>> the value of it. >>> >> >> Did you have a point? >> >> > It is not obvious to me that a fee cut will affect membership much. I'm > concerned that cutting fees is not actually a "membership drive" that > will increase membership and participation, but a soft option. I'm > concerned if there is unanimity that this move is a good thing. > > And I'm also concerned about your continuing rudeness on this list. I > have some experience in club organisation and a national voluntary > organisation, and I've been through the "let's cut membership/people > don't join because of the fee" discussion and its consequences in two > other contexts. I'm pretty busy on a project at the moment, and my > interest in participating as an active member of WMUK is not a given. > > If an organisation underprices itself in terms of membership, it affects > expectations (of what it will do for the members, of what the members > can agitate to have happen). There was some talk of hiring admin help, > which is the first step in developing a more solid structure that can > actually fulfil tasks that involve more than a bit of emailing around > and wiki editing. If WMUK needs such support, which I would say was the > case, then dropping the fee is undermining the idea that funds can be > raised that can be hypothecated to having administration and routine > work done. If say 400 hours a year staff work is to be done, on behalf > of things the members would like to see move forward, then this needs to > be funded sensibly, and money should not be waved away. The reciprocal > relationship of members paying into an organisation, and things > happening, is actually healthy. > > Charles > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > -- WereSpielChequers _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
