I agree with you analysis, and that we need to come up with some definition of entities not being a chapter but in need of official recognition and having some rights being formally regulated .
I would suggest we 1. come up with a name for these types of groups - "Friends of..", "Associates of ..." or something like that. 2. start to look into in how to regulate the relation to these new entities and how to control them. Actually I think Mike Godwins proposal for a new Chapter agreement, while being overly controlling for a chapter, would be appropriate as a start for a contract with these new entities. Yearly renewal periods and regular reporting should be OK in these cases.. Anders Wennersten treasurer Wikimedia Sverige Member of ChapCom > Aside from the new chapters, right now the Board of Trustees is looking > at what kinds of related groups we want to have relationships with. > (What prompts this directly is the case of Wikimedia Brazil, which was > approved to become a chapter last year, but whose organizers have since > decided they did not want to proceed as a formal entity at this time. > However, I want to ask about the general principle, not the specific > case.) The basic question is, what can or should we do to encourage > grassroots groups that want to support our mission, but may not fit into > the chapters framework? > > There are various possibilities here. One example is interest groups > that aren't tied to geography, the way the chapters are. I always cite > the idea of an Association of Blind Wikipedians, who might wish to > organize to promote work on accessibility issues. As with the Brazilian > situation, informal groups could also fit local conditions better > sometimes, or serve as a proto-chapter stage of development. Maybe > there's a benefit in having an association with some durability and > continuation, but without going to the effort of incorporation and > formal agreements on trademarks and such. It could also make sense to > have an organization form for a specific project and then disband after > it is completed, such as with Wikimania (somebody can correct me if I'm > wrong, but I understand the Gdansk team is planning something like this > as distinct from Wikimedia Polska). > > Anyway, I would like to invite ideas and discussion on this. Is this > something we should do? What kinds of models are people interested in? > How should we appropriately recognize and work with volunteer-organized > groups? And in all of this, how would we make it both distinct from and > compatible with the current structure of chapter organizations? > > --Michael Snow > > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Internal-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-l > > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
