Jan-Bart, what you call a 'membership model' is a democratically
established international NGO in which members have rights and obligations.
It operates under a charter accepted by the chapters that joined. Maybe you
would like to read the charter first, or think about the way the WMF (!)
approves
Jan-Bart de Vreede, 25/02/2013 02:36:
So I would not dare speak for the specific chapters, but I gather some of them
did not want to join simply because they did not like the membership model.
Could you elaborate? I don't get the grammatical meaning of this sentence.
Nemo
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 12:45 AM, Fae fae...@gmail.com wrote:
@Jan-Bart
One of the early discussions before agreeing the WCA charter was the
possibility of automatically counting all legally recognized chapters
as members. It was felt that this would not result in a credible
democratic
On Feb 25, 2013 9:41 AM, James Alexander jameso...@gmail.com wrote:
Err ok, I'm sorry but this actually moves to the realms of scary. You
require the new Council member to send in a statement ... pledging loyalty
essentially? I don't see anything in the charter that would require
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
On Feb 25, 2013 9:41 AM, James Alexander jameso...@gmail.com wrote:
Err ok, I'm sorry but this actually moves to the realms of scary.
You
require the new Council member to send in a statement ... pledging
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Thomas Dalton
thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
On Feb 25, 2013 9:41 AM, James Alexander jameso...@gmail.com wrote:
Err ok, I'm sorry but this actually moves to the realms of
Hey Ziko
No actually we did not agree on that. We agreed that there were several reasons
that chapters might not join the Chapters Association. Again: i do not know all
the specifics and cannot give you the arguments for the chapters that did not
join, but some certainly voiced a reluctance to
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
The model of voting delegates the casting of votes to members of the
council; which are individuals, chosen by chapters. Purely from a
practical perspective, it may not be possible for chapters to get
council members in order
Well, since the WCA don't plan to represent all the chapters, it would be
good it changed the name to a more suitable representation of the truth
(that would be something like European Chapters Association based on the
people present in the last
Seconding Béria here - by common sense, a group called the Wikimedia
Chapters Association would represent the Wikimedia chapters. If it only
exists to represent Wikimedia chapters that sign on to ideas X and Y, and
pledge Z, and attend meeting Q, then the name ought to be more
representative of
Am 25.02.2013 16:37, schrieb Béria Lima:
Well, since the WCA don't plan to represent all the chapters, it would be
good it changed the name to a more suitable representation of the truth
(that would be something like European Chapters Association based on the
people present in the last
«That representation should be co-extensive with taxation, not stopping
short of it, but also not going beyond it, is in accordance with the
theory of British institutions.»
http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/m/mill/john_stuart/m645r/chapter8.html
Béria Lima, 25/02/2013 16:37:
Well, since the WCA
Am 25.02.2013 16:45, schrieb Katherine Casey:
Seconding Béria here - by common sense, a group called the Wikimedia
Chapters Association would represent the Wikimedia chapters. If it only
exists to represent Wikimedia chapters that sign on to ideas X and Y, and
pledge Z, and attend meeting Q,
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.comwrote:
Of course it can legitimately represent only its members, while Jan-Bart
suggests to claim that it somehow represents also non-members that don't
mind participating in its discussions, by pretending they were
WM:SE opted out because they ware not comfortable with the statutes
(being too far from the movement aim on openness, transparency etc) (I
was not involved in this decision)
After last month discussion the sentiment has gone from wait and see
to skeptical - good we are not involved. Ie WM:SE
The opt-in model make sense to be sure that all members actually support the
WCA and what can be said in the name of the WCA.
But this is IMHO the problem, the WCA has been presented like a body that
should represent the chapters in negociation with the WMF, but it has been
received like a
I think the point about representing vs. serving was well understood
in the London meeting. The planned outcome is a series of actions that
serve all the chapters and even other entities. This will be our main
focus. As I said before, when it comes to representing, though, an
opt-in model is
Dariusz Jemielniak, 25/02/2013 16:59:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.comwrote:
Of course it can legitimately represent only its members, while Jan-Bart
suggests to claim that it somehow represents also non-members that don't
mind participating in its
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Ziko van Dijk vand...@wmnederland.nl wrote:
2013/2/25 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
That's one way of looking at it. Another is that the WCA is an
activity chapters can choose to participate in, or choose not to. To
the extent the WCA intends to represent its
For those commenting here that they would like to see all AffCom
recognized chapters voting for the Chair, please note this would take
a resolution to change the charter (section B Art 3) Each Chapter
selects one Council Member, by announcement of the Chapter to the
Chair of the Council.
I
Sorry wrong ref, easily done - I meant to paste in The Council elects
from its own Members a Chair and a Deputy Chair. (Section 3 Art 6).
Fae
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
That means the only votes belong to those on the Council; this could
be easily resolved by other chapters becoming members, as has been
said, but presumably some who have refused so far... do so because
they have to accept the rights, duties and obligations of a member.
These include allowing the
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
That means the only votes belong to those on the Council; this could
be easily resolved by other chapters becoming members, as has been
said, but presumably some who have refused so far... do so because
they have to accept the
Nathan, 25/02/2013 20:28:
By the by, did it not occur to anyone that having members of the
Association, members of the Council, and members of the Secretariat
might introduce some ambiguity into what is meant by the term
members?
Yes. ;-)
Pharos, 25/02/2013 22:10:
I see your point, and I agree that proposing to modify the bylaws
would not be a practical option for us now.
Perhaps, though, we might come up with some informal processes for
broader pan-chapter input before then...
Like, adding feedback on Meta talk pages? :)
Hi Darek and Markus,
in response to 2 seperate e-mails.
Dnia 25 lutego 2013 17:08 Markus Glaser lt;markus.gla...@wikimedia.degt;
napisał(a):
I think the point about representing vs. serving was well understood
in the London meeting. The planned outcome is a series of actions that
serve all the
Hi Darek and Markus,
in response to 2 seperate e-mails (once again, as this mailing list is killing
the formatting).
25 lutego 2013 17:08 Markus Glaser markus.gla...@wikimedia.de napisał(a):
I think the point about representing vs. serving was well understood
in the London meeting. The
On 25 February 2013 04:17, Newyorkbrad newyorkb...@gmail.com wrote:
...
voting. To the extent that a given member might wish to decide his or her
vote through consultation with his or her chapter -- through internal
discussion and consensus or a vote of the chapter board members or all the
Dear Jan Bart,
I think that your request would suggest a more open model... It may be that
this simple and natural request needs to have the ability to rediscuss the
whole organization.
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 1:35 AM, Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Hi All,
Not to be
Am 25.02.2013 23:13, schrieb Fae:
On 25 February 2013 04:17, Newyorkbrad newyorkb...@gmail.com wrote:
...
voting. To the extent that a given member might wish to decide his or her
vote through consultation with his or her chapter -- through internal
discussion and consensus or a vote of the
Hi,
The schedule of election for the Chapters Association Council Chair
has been announced at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Chapters_Association/Elections/2013_Chair
The schedule is:
Nominations open midnight (UTC) on Monday 25 February 2013.
Nominations close midnight on
Hi All,
Not to be incredibly mean about this, but how about giving a vote to all
chapters approved by the AffCom, rather than just the members? I know you are
looking at the membership model and trying to see if it will work for you, but
this sort of limits your options and perpetuates the
If chapters won't to be involved, why don't they join? I don't think there
is even a plan to charge membership fees yet, so what have they got to lose?
On Feb 25, 2013 12:35 AM, Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Hi All,
Not to be incredibly mean about this, but how about giving
So I would not dare speak for the specific chapters, but I gather some of them
did not want to join simply because they did not like the membership model. So
it might be good to open things up the other way around :)
Jan-Bart
On Feb 24, 2013, at 4:39 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
Although I'm pretty much a complete outsider to this process, and so my
opinion may be discounted accordingly, this schedule for voting may be a
little bit too expedited to be optimal. I'm especially concerned that only
one week is allotted between the close of nominations and the close of
voting.
35 matches
Mail list logo
