Re: [Wikimedia-l] Number of new User Groups

It is limited liability on both parts, meaning that user groups are not required to become legal entities, or maintain the higher reporting and capacity requirements that chapters and thematic organizations are required to maintain. The considerations that you are mentioning are tied to your

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Number of new User Groups

I think the issue is with the word "liability". That has a legal meaning to me that perhaps it wouldn't to others. It's a bit of a misunderstanding that user groups "are not required to become legal entities". We would be a legal entity whether or not we registered; we'd simply be an

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Number of new User Groups

Hi Manuel, Can you clarify what you mean by "limited liability" for user groups? I think you mean limited responsibilities as far as WMF is concerned. As far as the United States authorities are concerned, we have plenty of paperwork that we're expected to deal with, particularly if we're

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Number of new User Groups

Ilario, I agree that I would like to see more proactive mentoring and support. Some user groups may get born and die in ways that are fine. But others that are very promising for growth may wilt away due to lack of nurturing and support. I get the impression that Affcom itself is short on

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Number of new User Groups

*headdesk* Wikiconference USA, not Wikimedia Conference. Apologies to our friends in WMDE. On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Pine W wrote: > I think the issue is with the word "liability". That has a legal meaning > to me that perhaps it wouldn't to others. > > It's a bit

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Number of new User Groups

Every country is different, in Australia you cant have a bank account for a User group without being registered, you cant work with GLAM without having public liability insurance for which the UG needs to be registered to obtain. If you operate unregistered all members are personally legally

[Wikimedia-l] Recognition of Philippine Wikimedia Community User Group (PhilWiki Community)

Dear all, On behalf of the Affiliations Committee, I am honoured to announce the recognition [1] of Philippine Wikimedia Community User Group [2] (a.k.a. PhilWiki Community) as a Wikimedia User Group. Among their goals are creating, organizing, developing and engaging in activities that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Israel survey among HEWP editors

> Thanks Luis. added my notes next to yours. > > Hi, Michal- > Very interesting, thanks for sharing! Some comments in-line: > > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 2:59 AM, Michal Lester > wrote: > > > We are pleased to share with you the initial results of the HEWP editors > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Number of new User Groups

Im not sure now is the right time to divide affiliates. Thematic organizations and user groups are still new and there is still a heavy preference towards chapters. User groups are not necessarily small, and chapters are not necessarily large. I hear what you are saying about resources being

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Number of new User Groups

Ok, maybe more attention to user groups and small affiliates at WMCON is the way to go. I heard at WMCON 2015 that WMF was considering assigning more resources to supporting user groups, in addition to the community capacity development research. I would still like to see that happen, such as

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiconference USA 2015

Andrew Lih recorded our panel "Journalism and the Online Information Community", but I'm not sure when/if that video will make it to the web. I can't speak for the organizers, but it is my understanding that Gregory Kohs was banned under the Safe Space policy, not because he was a critic. Critics

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Number of new User Groups

I personally think that the main concern, in this proliferation of groups, is an lack of the implementation of a "good governance". A user group is like a body, it can born, can develop and can die. At the moment there is an unclear guideline about the monitoring and the development of these

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Number of new User Groups

Any process that divides the community isnt good for the community, we already seeing the effects of poor decisions being taken by groups and individuals acting in isolation On 18 October 2015 at 20:02, Leigh Thelmadatter wrote: > Im not sure now is the right time to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Number of new User Groups

The Affiliations Committee (AffCom) has been preparing for the increased momentum since the user group model was implemented, and it follows a pattern that we’ve been seeing over the past couple of years. In 2013, we approved 10 user groups, last year we approved 19, and so far this year we

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Number of new User Groups

IMHO, the idea of the user groups is not to divide the community, the main goal is to create the opportunity for small communities to work in the same direction, learn with each other and have a framework to work together, learning from and sharing experiences. The user group is an important

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Number of new User Groups

Hi Ilario, it is the will of the board to make it easy to start a recognised body to do work and it is totally acceptable if these bodies also die after having fulfilled their purpose - or grow and develop into other affiliation models. So the criterium for us is easy entry. Anyway the user

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] The Signpost -- Volume 11, Issue 41 -- 14 October 2015

Blog: Third Wikimedia Spain conference takes place in Madrid http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-10-14/Blog Editorial: Why the news media needs a Wikipedian in residence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-10-14/Editorial Op-ed: