Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
2009/7/9 Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com: The issue here is that, in the Catalan case for example, the effort is already beyond just a working group. You have a group of people who are more than mature to have their own organisation and make it succesful. What they lack is legitimity under the Wikimedia banner in order to talk to potential donors who would support their efforts if they only had the name. I think a formal Association of Catalan Wikimedians, recognised by the WMF as an affiliated organisation and with something quite similar to the chapters agreement would work well. Calling it a chapter will cause problems, since it overlaps with other chapters, but it can be much the same thing just with a different name. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 16:18, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/7/9 Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com: The issue here is that, in the Catalan case for example, the effort is already beyond just a working group. You have a group of people who are more than mature to have their own organisation and make it succesful. What they lack is legitimity under the Wikimedia banner in order to talk to potential donors who would support their efforts if they only had the name. I think a formal Association of Catalan Wikimedians, recognised by the WMF as an affiliated organisation and with something quite similar to the chapters agreement would work well. Calling it a chapter will cause problems, since it overlaps with other chapters, but it can be much the same thing just with a different name. Yes, keeping in mind that the most important thing here is, in my opinion, close collaboration with the chapters that are touched by this organisation. In cases like this, I am not sure that the Wikimedia Foundation is the best partner. In any case, the WMFoundation definitely should not be the only partner and recognition should also come from the chapters potentially involved. Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
2009/7/9 Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com: I think a formal Association of Catalan Wikimedians, recognised by the WMF as an affiliated organisation and with something quite similar to the chapters agreement would work well. Calling it a chapter will cause problems, since it overlaps with other chapters, but it can be much the same thing just with a different name. Yes, keeping in mind that the most important thing here is, in my opinion, close collaboration with the chapters that are touched by this organisation. In cases like this, I am not sure that the Wikimedia Foundation is the best partner. In any case, the WMFoundation definitely should not be the only partner and recognition should also come from the chapters potentially involved. Interesting thoughts. The WMF needs to be a partner since the WMF owns the relevant trademarks. The chapters certainly need to be involved, but I don't know if they should be involved in the recognition part (apart from maybe writing letters of support to the WMF). The WMF should probably consult them, since if one chapter is opposed it could cause some problems, so that should be sorted out beforehand. I'm just not really sure what it would mean for the chapters to recognise them. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 10:41 AM, Anders Wennerstenanders.wenners...@bonetmail.com wrote: I also like this approach *On most informal level - a Working Group, carefully organized under a Working Group Organizer who has a time-limited agreement/recognition letter with the Foundation *On intermediate level - a legally recognized organizations that could support an interest group, the organisation either being dedicated to the groups activity or being a supporting organization hosting the groups activities. In either case it should be possible to get an agreement in place without the full demands required for being recognized as a Chapter. Personally I agree the second point with different levels of approach to the local Chapter status. Ilario ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
Ilario, you said: without an organization it's impossible to found a point of contact (for example there is no legal representatives). I understand your concern, but in reality, there are many ways to determine a point of contact without an organization. For instance, instead of legal representatives, (in Brazil we'd have) task assigned peers. They could be the point of contact too. you also said: IMHO the case of Brazil can be a *type* of chapter (for example a first step) and not a different type of organization. I agree with you. In Brazil we have the same mission as any other chapter. Maybe it's a first step to become a chapter, but maybe it's a format for the long-term to do the same as the any other chapters (promote Wikimedia projects in a certain region). Shouldn't all types of chapters collaborate? Thomas ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
2009/7/8 Thomas de Souza Buckup thomasdesouzabuc...@gmail.com: Ilario, you said: without an organization it's impossible to found a point of contact (for example there is no legal representatives). I understand your concern, but in reality, there are many ways to determine a point of contact without an organization. For instance, instead of legal representatives, (in Brazil we'd have) task assigned peers. They could be the point of contact too. They can be a point of contact for their task, but not for the group as a whole. I think the Brazilian method will work quite well at doing individual initiatives, it's the higher level stuff you may not be able to do as much as regular chapters. IMHO the case of Brazil can be a *type* of chapter (for example a first step) and not a different type of organization. I agree with you. In Brazil we have the same mission as any other chapter. Maybe it's a first step to become a chapter, but maybe it's a format for the long-term to do the same as the any other chapters (promote Wikimedia projects in a certain region). Shouldn't all types of chapters collaborate? The problem is, there is nothing to actually recognise as a chapter. There is nobody to sign a chapters agreement (you would have to have every member sign it and then amend it whenever someone joined or left). There is nothing to stop you doing most of the same things that chapters do, but I can't see how you can actually be a chapter. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 06:54, Michael Snowwikipe...@verizon.net wrote: 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? As an answer to this question, I would say yes. My nuances come later. 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). I think it's important to keep in mind the implications of supporting Wikimedia. These implications fall, in my opinion, in two categories: - Use of the trademark - Financial flow (access to specific grants, fundraising) I see three scenarii: 1) informal national chapters or chapters to be: There are countries in the world where starting a chapter in the way it is defined today is an endeavour that makes little sense, for political, cultural, philosophical, financial or administrative reasons. Here I'll make a difference between informal local/national groups (will never be a chapter) and chapters to be (aims at becoming a chapter). For informal national groups, it is important that the Wikimedia Foundation supports grassroot initiatives that aim at supporting the Wikimedia projects. If the work stays informal, and there is no need for any kind of formality (plan wikimeets, intervene in conferences, that kind of grassroot public outreach), then the support from the Foundation could be minimal, such as maybe a letter of introduction for someone wanting to participate in a conference in a specific country. If, on the other hand, the need shows up for a formal kind of representation, there are probably many ways to explore on how a group of Wikimedians could integrate an existing structure (some other NGO with similar goals) in order to enter a formal agreement with the WMF re: trademarks and/or fundraising. I believe we could develop some kind of partnership agreeement with third party non-profits which would allow active Wikimedians who are not able or willing to form a chapter to intensify outreach in some kind of structured way, under a Wikimedia banner. For chapters to be, I think the same could happen, with the idea that the grassroot initiative wants to take some time to develop into a working national chapter. Growing initiatives with the help of an existing structure could be a good first step towards chapteriality, and it is important that the WMF follow those initiatives and help the members who wish to develop the best way of founding a chapter by developing ideas in another context. What I don't see, in either of these cases, is an informal group with the same objectives of fundraising and potentially trademark usage that stays completely informal. Of course, national legislations may vary, but in the end, in order to protect the trademark and reputation of Wikimedia, it seems to be very hard to have constantly renewed individuals being the Wikimedia flagship in one country or the other. 2) Specific events/projects I don't know about the Gdansk team and whether they have indeed decided to set up an ephemeral organisation, but I suppose it would make sense, in the case of a defined event, or project, to do something of the kind. Again, I suppose legal jurisdictions have different ways of going about this. This said, for such cases, the WMF could also enter some kind of clear agreement which allows the ephemeral group to use the trademarks and fundraise (or find sponsors as for Wikimania) for a specific project. 3) Trans-national interest groups. I remember us discussing wildly the Association of blind Wikipedians ;-). It's a good example, as is a potential Wikimedia Catalunya and this kind of transnational grassroot initiative is probably the hardest case. Of course, as Thomas Dalton said later in this thread, we can't really (and shouldn't have to) prevent a Wiki for the blind organisation to see the light of day. The question comes when this organisation starts to fundraise using the fact that they're going to help the Wikimedia projects and thus comes, to some extent, in competition with existing organisations (chapters and the Foundation). The question is really, at which point is there actual competition? I
Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
2009/7/8 Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com: I have researched a bit, while looking at the catalan case and my conclusion is that such interest groups might be able to fundraise where national chapters and the Foundation can't. It is impossible (and in any case not desirable) for Wikimedia France or Wikimedia Italia (and one day Wikimedia Spain) to change their bylaws to focus on catalan in order to attract some grants that would be only be given to such interest groups or to fundraise in the interested part of the population. I don't know the details of the catalan case and I think it is probably quite different to the Welsh case, but I'll describe the Wikimedia UK thoughts on that subject. There is a significant possibility of specific grants for improving the Welsh Wikipedia (and other projects) and also simply for donations from the Welsh public (similar things apply to Scotland and Northern Ireland, although to a lesser extent). In order to enable us to take full advantage of those opportunities we specifically got permission from the WMF to use the names Wikimedia Wales (etc.) in addition to Wikimedia UK. We haven't used those names for anything yet, but we have considered the possibility of some kind of sub-chapter (what form that would take legally, I don't know, there are various options, but it would probably be something fairly informal) made up of members from that country carrying out initiatives in that country. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: I don't know the details of the catalan case and I think it is probably quite different to the Welsh case As far as I know, you're right -- they are very different. :-) My understanding of the catalan case is that a group of people want to make a Catalan-language-type chapter, where it is registered in one country but can carry out activities in other areas where the Catalan language is widely used. (They run into a small problem when these areas are located in countries that already have chapters (fr/it) and ones that might have them in the future (es).) The Meta page will probably give a better explanation for those interested: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_in_Catalan -- Casey Brown Cbrown1023 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
2009/7/8 Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com: Exactly. One (the Welsh) is integrated into the geographic region of one chapter, the other (the Catalan) spreads across geographic regions taken care of by several chapters. On the case of the Welsh, I see no problem of having a Wikimedia Wales as a section of Wikimedia UK, for example. But that is a different story :) That's what I thought. I felt it was worth bringing up the other story as well, though - it's still relevant to this discussion. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 10:52 PM, Thomas de Souza Buckupthomasdesouzabuc...@gmail.com wrote: *We are **a movement of autonomous volunteers: * - *Instead of a legal entity, an open movement* - *Instead of bylaws, a statement of principles* - *Instead of legal representatives, task assigned peers* - *Instead of internal finances, grants can go through partners* *Actions come first to material resources!* Nothing against but there is an important point missed... * Instead of a organization... Someone has stated here that to sign a chapters agreement, for example, it's important to have a legal entity or, at least, an organization. I think that it could be different also to discuss with someone because without an organization it's impossible also to found a point of contact (for example there is no legal representatives). IMHO the case of Brazil can be a *type* of chapter (for example a first step) and not a different type of organization (considering that there is no organization as I can see). Ilario ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
Thomas Dalton, 06/07/2009 16:58: In the UK there is a concept of an unincorporated association where the association (which can have full charitable status) isn't a legal entity in its own right and any agreements it makes are actually made with the Board of Trustees as a group of individuals but there is some kind of legislation that ensures continuity - when the membership of the board changes, the parties to the agreements somehow change (I didn't investigate this in much detail because Wikimedia UK decided to go down the incorporated route). That kind of association would work absolutely fine as a chapter (the main disadvantage is that the board are personally liable for the chapter's debts, including court ordered fines and damages) Wikimedia Italia is an association more or less like that («associazione non riconosciuta» = without «personalità giuridica»). :-) Nemo ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
I agree that this is a discussion worth having. Chapters fulfil one very specific purpose (furthering the goals of the movement within a certain geographical area), there are all kinds of other useful things to do which need appropriate tools. Several people have talked about informal groups signing things (contracts similar to the chapters agreement, MoU's, etc.). For a group without any legal structure, this isn't really possible. The group can't sign anything, just the individuals. For a group set up for one short term project, this isn't too bad (although it isn't great), but for a long term thing like the Brazilian non-chapter it isn't an option because the membership is going to be constantly changing. In the UK there is a concept of an unincorporated association where the association (which can have full charitable status) isn't a legal entity in its own right and any agreements it makes are actually made with the Board of Trustees as a group of individuals but there is some kind of legislation that ensures continuity - when the membership of the board changes, the parties to the agreements somehow change (I didn't investigate this in much detail because Wikimedia UK decided to go down the incorporated route). That kind of association would work absolutely fine as a chapter (the main disadvantage is that the board are personally liable for the chapter's debts, including court ordered fines and damages) and doesn't need a separate framework, but as I understand it there isn't any such option for Brazil (or, if there is, it is no better than the alternative). There is nothing that I can see that would stop an Assoc. of Blind Wikipedians (or similar) from incorporating somewhere (wherever is most convenient or legally favourable) and could have local chapters of its own. It could then sign something similar to a chapters agreement, although with a different name (affiliated organisation?). Groups that don't want (or can't have) any kind of legal structure can just sign ad-hoc agreements with the WMF as individuals for grants or trademarks or whatever for any specific project they may want to do. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
On Sun, 2009-07-05 at 21:54 -0700, Michael Snow wrote: 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. Actually, that sounds like a good idea. I wonder if there's interest among people involved with accessibility (whether blind or not - for example I'd potentially be interested in helping). More concretely, there has been (for a while) talk of a Wikibooks chapter... it obviously wouldn't be based on geography, but could promote Wikibooks and Wikibooks-related issues, and develop programs and software for that project. Many of the sister projects may feel a similar need - other than Commons, I don't know of any major projects to promote growth or reach for the non-Wikipedia projects. Disappointingly, the usability initiative is explicitly about improving usability on Wikipedia, and not other projects. While there may be concomittant improvements, there's nothing specific for us, while everything is specific for Wikipedia. Luckily that will be addressed for Commons with this latest grant. However, beyond technical issues, there is a lot the Wikibooks community could do in terms of promotion and outreach that isn't being done by the community or the Foundation currently. There's only so much volunteers can do from the bottom up without some organization and support, and the Foundation can only do so much from the top down. An organized chapter-like body would fill a gap between the two that could potentially have an enormous impact on the project since it smaller. Thanks, -Mike ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
Michael, thanks for starting this thread. I'll try to synthesize below some information about the development of the Brazilian chapter. I hope the list will find it useful. A group of volunteers spent more than one year discussing, writing, translating and approving the bylaws to create a legal entity for a future chapter in Brazil (we were blindly following the guidelines). By the end of the process we realized that the requested bureaucracy did and would not really help us much in order to promote the Wikimedia projects in Brazil. In fact, it is quite the opposite. We shared our concerns and ideas with the other chapters during the Chapters Meeting in Berlin. Since than, we've been trying to wiki the guidelines for the creation of new chapters. We see ourselves with the same mission of any other Wikimedia chapter, but we don't need any legal entity. The structure below would much better fit our needs, considering the Brazilian context and culture. (extracted from the Chapters Meeting presentation) *We are **a movement of autonomous volunteers: * - *Instead of a legal entity, an open movement* - *Instead of bylaws, a statement of principles* - *Instead of legal representatives, task assigned peers* - *Instead of internal finances, grants can go through partners* *Actions come first to material resources!* The movement called wikibrasil is finally growing organically, with less bureaucracy and more action. We are definitely a grassroots initiative, where any volunteer feels engaged and empowered to promote the Wikimedia projects. Should it be any different from that? I hope this thread can help us understand that there is hardly ever a single formula that fits every single country. We could still be the cohesive global movement that started 8 years ago. abraços, Thomas ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
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 foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
