I gave my personal opinion one hour before your mail Samuel.
_____
*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 19:41, Samuel Klein <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 3:35 PM, 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.
>
> I agree with this - clarity is important for the sake of these discussions.
>
> However the new affiliations would have limited impact on funds
> dissemination; any group that would be recognized as a new affiliation
> can already get funds through an existing channel.  Recognizing other
> affiliations primarily makes it easier for groups to use the
> trademarks, and for the movement to give social recognition to a group
> before it passes the high bar of 'critical mass' of effort.
>
> > 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.
>
> These two reasons are more relevant to working this out in advance of
> Berlin.  There are details to discuss and sort out about affiliations,
> but there are larger issues that will require face-to-face discussion.
>
> Lodewijk writes:
> > 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).
>
> I would like to know the answer as well.  Any practical problems can
> be amended or changed.
> Are there philosophical disagreements?
>
> Sam.
>
_______________________________________________
Movementroles mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/movementroles

Reply via email to