On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Brian <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Tim Landscheidt > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> > [...] >> >> > The WMF as a membership organisation would be great, but I don't >> think >> >> > it is practical. A better option (which I have discussed with a few >> >> > poeple) would be having the chapters as members of the WMF and the >> >> > community as members of the chapters. There are other global >> >> > non-profits that work along those lines. (The International >> Federation >> >> > of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, for example.) >> >> >> Why? What's broken at the moment? >> >> > The English full-history dump, for one. >> >> And that would work if the WMF were a membership organiza- >> tion? Interesting. >> >> Tim >> > > If it were once again a membership organization it would imply that the > Foundation had not reneged on the original vision without the ability of the > community, which approved that vision, to provide input on the modified > input. It would turn around the Foundation's usurping of community power. It > would give each community member a voice. > Sorry, "input" is an overloaded word for me due to my occupation in neural networks. I happen to be working with several "input layers" right now and flubbed that entirely ;) But it should say, "to provide input on the modified vision." _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
