Define is one thing, but I do believe would be better have the final decision in person (Maybe in Paris if Berlin is too far away.) _____ *Béria Lima* <http://wikimedia.pt/>(351) 925 171 484
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. <http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos>* On 11 February 2012 18:35, Lodewijk <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Béria, > > I think it depends what depends on this decision. I can very well imagine > that many decisions in fund dissemination depend on who exactly is involved > in this movement of ours. For that discussion it would be helpful to have > already a good definition of the groups - then we can have a constructive > discussion next about what the rights and obligations of each of these > groups (and the WMF) would be to each other and in general. So if (*if*) we > want to have the discussion about fund dissemination in Berlin, it would > make a lot of sense to me to decide on these definitions (a little while) > before the meeting. Unless you would be fine to have that discussion about > funds without knowing who exactly is in this movement. > > Another reason (less important) could be that it would be helpful if > chapcom could implement some parts of this in its procedures at its face to > face meeting in Berlin, too. > > We can't keep pushing all decisions to Berlin, because that would simply > result in an ineffective meeting. Anyway, I might be wrong that this is the > reasoning of Samuel on this timeline, but that would for me be a valid > argument :) The question would the be however, is there a good reason to > wait? Are there strong disagreements? (I know there are some parts of it > which we disagreed on within chapcom, because of the practical > implementations). > > Best, > > Lodewijk > > No dia Sábado, 11 de Fevereiro de 2012, Béria [email protected]: > > She meant that you pushing a decision BEFORE the Chapters meeting by >> placing a deadline before the meeting. And I second: What is the rush? >> _____ >> *Béria Lima* >> <http://wikimedia.pt/>(351) 925 171 484 >> >> *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter >> livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a >> construir esse sonho. <http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos>* >> >> >> On 11 February 2012 04:41, Samuel Klein <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, aude <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > On Feb 10, 2012, at 10:43 AM, Samuel Klein <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > >>> >> The Wikimedia Board is drafting two resolutions to recognize new >>> >> models of affiliation. The text will be posted on Meta for discussion >>> >> and improvement, between now and 10 March. >>> > >>> > Will you please send this to internal-l? Is there really any consensus >>> or broad support for this? >>> >>> Hi Katie. It should be sent out this weekend. >>> I believe there is broad support for recognizing new models for >>> affiliation; if there are implementation details for which there is >>> not such support, I expect they will be sorted out in public >>> discussion. >>> >>> > And how about discussion at the chapter meeting? >>> > Maybe a joint chapter-wmf session at chapters meeting to talk? >>> >>> This was put out in advance of the chapter meeting, to lead to >>> discussion there. >>> A joint session is a good idea, do you mean specifically about new >>> affiliations? >>> >>> SJ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Movementroles mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/movementroles >>> >> >>
_______________________________________________ Movementroles mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/movementroles
