On 18 Aug 2009, at 14:08, Nick Whitelegg wrote: >> My main comment was that the proposal didn't 'sit' well with the > government regional structures. > > I do have to make the comment though that the government regional > structures are rather arbitrary and do not reflect real cultural > regions. > > Where I am in Southampton, I'm supposedly in the same governnment > regional > area as places 100 or 150 miles east of me, yet places just 10 miles > to > the northwest are in a different regional area. Thus if we are to > organise > English regional chapters, they should revolve around real population > centres (e.g. Southampton/Portsmouth/Bournemouth, Bristol, > Newcastle, etc) > rather than arbitrary and meaningless government definitions.
The distinctions are not arbitrary and meaningless to government, far from it. My point was that if, and only if the local chapter was created to help communicate with government then we should align our structure to their structure. If, we don't want to talk to government then why do we need the hassle of a legal entity at all? Also... We must make sure that any structure we devise will cover the country completely in a way that works for everyone. I note that Traveline doesn't align with government regional structures, but that every county is in one and only one Traveline region. Police forces were meant to reorganise around government regions but this was resisted and was I believe abandoned. http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolpda/ukfs_news/hi/newsid_4466000/4466412.stm?l Regards, Peter > > Nick _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
