On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Dan Rosenthal swatjes...@gmail.com wrote:
Was this some sort of unilateral proclamation by Ting, or has the
chapters committee officially made some sort of decision on this topic?
A principal decision on sub-national chapters has been made by the
*board* (the
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 2:24 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
cimonav...@gmail.com wrote:
Wow!, just wow. Would you be okay with one country that was
very tiny having two chapters?
If the very tiny country had enough active wikimedians to create
critical mass for two chapters, and if those two groups
Hoi,
Without the five persons that make the difference, there is no chapter
anyway.
Andrew, the NYC does not need my approval but given what I know of their
activities so far, they are doing great. This does however not mean that the
issues that are raised have been answered, far from it.
Your
Ziko van Dijk wrote:
Emotional: Having a NYC chapter next to the French, German etc.
makes France, Germany etc. look the equals to New York.
And in some ways they are. If that makes you feel bad, that's
your problem. Did you feel better when there was no chapter at all
in the United
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:14 AM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
Andrew, the NYC does not need my approval but given what I know of their
activities so far, they are doing great. This does however not mean that the
issues that are raised have been answered, far from it.
You
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
These emotional arguments are not practical. In my opinion
there is a need for a USA chapter because there are things that
the Office should not handle and that should be handled by an
USA chapter.
First you say emotions are pointless, then you express your own
Thanks again for your explanations (I don't want to open a new mail for
every bit).
Some points:
* Of the organizations Lars mentioned, only ISOC has chapters. I still
find it not clear about whether the national organizations are independent
or merely national agencies of the center (as it is
: [Foundation-l] Board resolutions (chapters)
Thanks again for your explanations (I don't want to open a new mail for
every bit).
Some points:
* Of the organizations Lars mentioned, only ISOC has chapters. I still
find it not clear about whether the national organizations are independent
or merely
Dan Rosenthal wrote:
On Jan 21, 2009, at 2:13 AM, Florence Devouard wrote:
Nathan wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
2009/1/20 Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de:
Not quite. One criteria is that the chapters should have
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Ziko van Dijk zvand...@googlemail.com wrote:
* Of the organizations Lars mentioned, only ISOC has chapters. I still
find it not clear about whether the national organizations are independent
or merely national agencies of the center (as it is the case with
Andrew Whitworth wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 2:24 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
cimonav...@gmail.com wrote:
Wow!, just wow. Would you be okay with one country that was
very tiny having two chapters?
If the very tiny country had enough active wikimedians to create
critical mass for
Florence Devouard wrote:
The confusion mostly came from the fact I had absolutely not
understood that chapters at the national level, or chapter at
any other level would have exactly the same rights and roles
than the currently existing chapters.
I'm confused by your description of
:36:24 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board resolutions (chapters)
2009/1/21 Geoffrey Plourde geo.p...@yahoo.com:
It is extraordinarily difficult to found a US chapter, because we are in
essence a federation of 50 little nations. Every state has their own unique
characteristics and their own
Austin Hair wrote:
Every chapter has unique
considerations specific to its social and political circumstances—be
it Taiwan, Serbia, Hong Kong, or New York City—but, as far as we're
concerned, there's no such thing as a second-class chapter.
Speaking only for myself as one board member among
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 2:11 AM, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
Austin Hair wrote:
Every chapter has unique
considerations specific to its social and political circumstances—be
it Taiwan, Serbia, Hong Kong, or New York City—but, as far as we're
concerned, there's no such thing as a
Hoi,
When the New York people get their chapter, they are part of the USA legal
system. It makes sense imho opinion to have a NY chapter if this is
necessary to organise things that require a legal setting. Things like
charitable donations. If these aspects are not relevant, there is no real
need
Gerard Meijssen schrieb:
Hoi,
When the New York people get their chapter, they are part of the USA legal
system. It makes sense imho opinion to have a NY chapter if this is
necessary to organise things that require a legal setting. Things like
charitable donations. If these aspects are not
Hoi,
So in essence by having a New York chapter, it became impossible to have an
USA chapter? Or do we need to propose an Amsterdam sub chapter that will get
all the trimmings like New York? The argument that the USA is so big is not
that strong either, we could have a Moscow sub chapter or one
Not at all. There's no reason that the national and subnational chapters
have to perform the same functions. It's entirely possible that the national
chapter can serve as an organizational and facilitating umbrella for
subnational chapters.
As to your arguments that having a NY chapter obviates
Gerard Meijssen schrieb:
Hoi,
So in essence by having a New York chapter, it became impossible to have an
USA chapter? Or do we need to propose an Amsterdam sub chapter that will get
all the trimmings like New York? The argument that the USA is so big is not
that strong either, we could have
Hoi,
What I said was that the NY chapter prevents an USA chapter. It would be
obvious to have one such. With one in place, you can organise to your hearts
content wherever you like.
Thanks,
GerardM
2009/1/20 Dan Rosenthal swatjes...@gmail.com
Not at all. There's no reason that the
Michael Snow wrote:
Florence Devouard wrote:
For example, on meta, Wikimedia NYC is listed as chapters, not
subchapters. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_New_York_City. And
the name does not clarify the difference either (it could have been
mandatory that names used be of the type
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Dan Rosenthal swatjes...@gmail.com wrote:
As to your arguments that having a NY chapter obviates the need for other
subnational US chapters, I disagree. There are plenty of reasons why a
person outside of NY would want to become a member of a US subnational
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
So in essence by having a New York chapter, it became impossible to have an
USA chapter? Or do we need to propose an Amsterdam sub chapter that will get
all the trimmings like New York? The argument that the USA is so big is not
that strong either, we could have a
Hoi,
Is it like in Animal farm that all countries are equal but some are more
equal then others? By calling NY a sub chapter, it is inherent that there is
room for a USA chapter. Each chapter has one vote as I understand it or will
each subchapter have one as well ??
Originally the notion of a
I was wondering myself.
I thought this information would be in the FAQ, but it is not.
Two questions.
First, the annual meeting.
We hold an annual meeting between all chapters and WMF.
Already, because of the number of chapters, it is recommanded that only
one representant of all chapters come
Hoi,
The territofy for the Dutch chapter ends officially at the border between
Belgium and the Netherlands. There is no Belgium chapter and given their
politics it is unlikely that there will be one. The projects in the Dutch
language include many Belgians and they are welcome to become a member
Guillaume Paumier wrote:
Hello,
[it might be useful to move this topic to a dedicated thread if it goes on]
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Florence Devouard anthe...@yahoo.com
wrote:
We hold an annual meeting between all chapters and WMF.
Already, because of the number of chapters,
Hi Florence,
First, when a meeting occur with say, 25 people, there is room for
discussions and work. When a meeting occur with 100 people, much less.
Last year was fine. This year will probably be okay in terms of figures.
But every year will become more and more difficult. How many people
Sebastian Moleski wrote:
Hi Florence,
First, when a meeting occur with say, 25 people, there is room for
discussions and work. When a meeting occur with 100 people, much less.
Last year was fine. This year will probably be okay in terms of figures.
But every year will become more and more
Just to look at this from another angle, what reasoning was there to limit the
geographical extent of the new york chapter
to the new york city metropolitan area. Why not the entire state of new york?
Does having this NYC chapter prevent the
existence of a chapter representing the whole state
Hoi,
So the only reason why chapters cannot overlap is possible commercial
nastiness Does the NYC have a license to negotiate as much as another
USA (sub)-chapter have. What is left for the Wikimedia Foundation itself ?
How do you make commercial organisations split along our lines ?
As I
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com wrote:
It is interesting how the power distance thing is playing out here. :)
I'm not getting the reference. Can you help?
I don't agree that that's necessarily the case. It's entirely within
the realm of possibility for a
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
So the only reason why chapters cannot overlap is possible commercial
nastiness Does the NYC have a license to negotiate as much as another
USA (sub)-chapter have.
Yes, inside their own areas.
What is left for the Wikimedia Foundation itself ?
Why, the
Hoi,
When the only reason why chapters cannot overlap is because of a fear that a
commercial organisation plays one chapter against another, I fail to agree
that this is a good reason. Obviously chapters are involved in such
negotiations, that is not the point.
I am quite ok with chapters being
Ting Chen wrote:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
The territofy for the Dutch chapter ends officially at the border between
Belgium and the Netherlands.
I don't see it necessary to be must so. As you have said, it is unlikely
that there would be a Belgium chapter. So if the community support the
Florence Devouard wrote:
Ting Chen wrote:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
The territofy for the Dutch chapter ends officially at the border between
Belgium and the Netherlands.
I don't see it necessary to be must so. As you have said, it is unlikely
that there would be a
Hoi,
If the Wikimedia Foundations needs chapters that can act and will act, you
do not want chapters that act only like societies. If you truly want active
and responsible organisations you have to be clear about this need and
assess the performance of chapters accordingly. I completely agree that
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Florence Devouard anthe...@yahoo.com wrote:
If this were the case, establishing any sort of organization with
organizations as members and some sort of decision-making authority
would generally be close to impossible. If there is disagreement in
certain areas
Sebastian Moleski wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Florence Devouard anthe...@yahoo.com
wrote:
I don't agree that that's necessarily the case. It's entirely within
the realm of possibility for a chapter (board) to appoint a
representative who can make decisions/vote on behalf of the
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
If the Wikimedia Foundations needs chapters that can act and will act, you
do not want chapters that act only like societies. If you truly want active
and responsible organisations you have to be clear about this need and
assess the performance of chapters
[OT]
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 13:34, Sebastian Moleski seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com wrote:
It is interesting how the power distance thing is playing out here. :)
I'm not getting the reference. Can you help?
For Germans, power
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 4:35 AM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi,
What I said was that the NY chapter prevents an USA chapter. It would be
obvious to have one such. With one in place, you can organise to your hearts
content wherever you like.
Thanks,
Two answers to this
First, I do not want to diminish the happiness of the New Yorkers having a
chapter making their activities easier. But I do think very negative about
this step of the Board, both for emotional and practical reasons.
Emotional: Having a NYC chapter next to the French, German etc. makes
France,
2009/1/20 Andrew Whitworth wknight8...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 4:35 AM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi,
What I said was that the NY chapter prevents an USA chapter. It would be
obvious to have one such. With one in place, you can organise to your hearts
Ziko van Dijk wrote:
First, I do not want to diminish the happiness of the New Yorkers having a
chapter making their activities easier. But I do think very negative about
this step of the Board, both for emotional and practical reasons.
Emotional: Having a NYC chapter next to the French,
Delphine Ménard wrote:
[OT]
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 13:34, Sebastian Moleski seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com
wrote:
It is interesting how the power distance thing is playing out here. :)
I'm not getting the reference. Can you
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Ziko van Dijk zvand...@googlemail.com wrote:
Emotional: Having a NYC chapter next to the French, German etc. makes
France, Germany etc. look the equals to New York. It makes the Wikimedia
Foundation look an American organization that has regional chapters in the
New York City is a city, and France or Germany are nations. In the
geopolitical sense, the two are very different. However, in terms of
chapters the geopolitical boundaries are meaningless. Chapters are
defined and measured by their levels of participation. We don't say
that a nation must
2009/1/20 Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Andrew Whitworth wknight8...@gmail.com
wrote:
Two answers to this question:
1) WMNYC does prevent the creation of a separate WMUSA chapter. At the
moment the rule-of-thumb is that chapters cannot overlap.
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 9:30 AM, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, one benefit would be that it avoids strange definitions of
chapter boundaries. Suppose that we have a Los Angeles chapter and a
Monterey County chapter, and then people from San Jose, Sacramento and
a few smaller
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
New York City is a city, and France or Germany are nations. In the
geopolitical sense, the two are very different. However, in terms of
chapters the geopolitical boundaries are meaningless. Chapters are
defined and
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
It does seem odd to me that there is a New York City chapter rather
than a New York chapter. As I understand it, companies in the US are
registered at state level. State boundaries are far more clearly
defined (yes,
Can we stop using the words sub-chapter? It implies something that doesn't
exist - there are sub-national chapters, which is descriptive of their
geographic coverage and nothing else. Sub-chapter seems to suggest some
grouping less than a full chapter, or subordinate to a chapter, and that
isn't
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi,
At some stage you get used to it. Some people call the language committee
the language sub-committee. This while the committee it should be a sub
off does not even exist any more.
While I do think that
Florence writes:
The chapters has agreement with the WMF that they may in their area
negotiate with third parties on use of wikimedia project logos and
names.
Actually, that's a pretty optimistic view of the situation.
The very largest majority of chapters do not have agreement.
Afaik,
Ziko,
The United States previously had no chapter, no organization in which
members of the community could gain membership and organize events,
activities and pursuits independent from the legal organization of
Wikimedia.
The state of New York has 20 million people. What country in Europe or
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote:
That doesn't change my point, it's just a matter of scale... Suppose
there's a chapter in Georgia, and one for Kentucky and Tennessee. Then
some people come around and start on a chapter for the southeast.
That's going
Ting writes:
yes, this is also very unconvenient for the foundation and this is the
reason why the board want to talk to the chapter about the growth and
maturity of the chapters. If we can help, we would like to help. We
want
that all chapters can do agreements and the foundations don't
Andrew's comment brings up a separate, but serious, issue.
Suppose the Hong Kong chapter had initially declared itself the Chinese
chapter - would that forever preclude the creation of other, separate
chapters within the geographical territory of China? That presents a
first-past-the-post
Hoi,
Please understand what a chapter could do, should do when you take the
projects out of the equation for a moment. The WMF organisation, and the
chapters are part of that, ENABLE the projects. Border lines are typically
where jurisdictions start and end. If that does not make sense to you, we
By the way, this word chapter is unfamiliar for me, a German. I did not
hear it before I became a Wikimedian. What does this English word mean? Any
sub division of an organisation, or is it rather associated to a city than
to a country?
A chapter is a sub-division of an organisation. I'm not
Florence Devouard wrote:
Are sub-chapters going to have one representant as well ?
There are no sub-chapters. The proper term is sub-national chapters.
And they are chapters as much as any other chapter.
--Jimbo
___
foundation-l mailing list
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Florence Devouard wrote:
Michael Snow wrote:
Florence Devouard wrote:
For example, on meta, Wikimedia NYC is listed as chapters, not
subchapters.
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_New_York_City. And the
name does not clarify the
--- On Tue, 1/20/09, Ziko van Dijk zvand...@googlemail.com wrote:
By the way, this word chapter is unfamiliar for
me, a German. I did not
hear it before I became a Wikimedian. What does this
English word mean? Any
sub division of an organisation, or is it rather associated
to a city
Florence and Gerard,
Could you perhaps not insist on using the non-existent term sub-chapters?
If we're going to rehash the ages old discussion on US chapters and what
does a chapter do and Why does the US need this and other such dead
horses, it'd be nice if we all used the proper terminology.
: Re: [Foundation-l] Board resolutions (chapters)
Florence and Gerard,
Could you perhaps not insist on using the non-existent term sub-chapters?
If we're going to rehash the ages old discussion on US chapters and what
does a chapter do and Why does the US need this and other such dead
horses, it'd
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
When the right five friends come together, they do not need their dog to
make a successful organisation. Five people are enough to make a bored, five
people are enough to raise money. It takes dedication and a lot
Hoi,
When you call the non performing chapters malperforming, I am ok with that.
It is calling a spade a spade.
Calling it insulting that the NYC has fewer responsibilities indicates that
you have a thin skin. I am the first to acknowledge that the NYC did some
great things. I love to learn the
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.comwrote:
[snip] The one thing
were you do not get it, is that it is not geographically, it is about
jurisdictions, tax exemptons et al. This is where national rules make the
difference.
Could you rephrase this? I've
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
2009/1/20 Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de:
Not quite. One criteria is that the chapters should have well defined
geographical areas and they should not overlap. So an Amsterdam chapter
beside a Dutch chapter is not
Mike Godwin wrote:
Florence writes:
The chapters has agreement with the WMF that they may in their area
negotiate with third parties on use of wikimedia project logos and
names.
Actually, that's a pretty optimistic view of the situation.
The very largest majority of chapters do not have
Nathan wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
2009/1/20 Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de:
Not quite. One criteria is that the chapters should have well defined
geographical areas and they should not overlap. So an Amsterdam chapter
beside a Dutch chapter
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
Austin Hair wrote:
Every chapter has unique
considerations specific to its social and political circumstances—be
it Taiwan, Serbia, Hong Kong, or New York City—but, as far as we're
concerned, there's no such thing as a second-class chapter.
Michael Snow wrote:
I've been assembling my notes from last week's board meeting to pass
along. The first set of items I have to report is business from the
chapters committee. All of these resolutions have been posted on the
foundation website.
We approved two new chapters, and there's
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Florence Devouard anthe...@yahoo.com wrote:
For the sake of clarity, I'd like to ask that a mean is given to
recognize that a sub-chapter is a sub-chapter rather than a chapter.
If not in the name that we use within ourselves, at least on meta and
internal
I've been assembling my notes from last week's board meeting to pass
along. The first set of items I have to report is business from the
chapters committee. All of these resolutions have been posted on the
foundation website.
We approved two new chapters, and there's something special about
77 matches
Mail list logo
