Hi Peaceray, I just wanted to clarify one point regarding chapters and user groups. CWUG wasn't classified as a user group instead of as a chapter because it was more expedient, or because the Affiliations Committee is skittish about new chapters; rather, the mandatory classification of all new groups as user groups -- and a two-year period of activity *as a user group* before being able to apply for recognition as a chapter -- are requirements that have been set by the WMF Board of Trustees [1].
Cheers, Kirill [1] http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2013-11-24#Movement_roles On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 2:38 AM, Raymond Leonard < [email protected]> wrote: > Pine & all, > > I am agreed that this has been rough & frustrating process, especially > considering that our goal is to become a chapter & that we got the word > that initially becoming a user group should be more expedient. Consider > that beyond membership goals, there are an additional six requirements > (listed first) in common for user groups, chapters, & thematic > organizations, & an additional six for chapters & thematic organizations. > Here is how CWUG stack up on those requirements: > > > - *Focus:* Geographic > - *Mission aligned with Wikimedia Foundation:* Yes > - *Compliance with naming guidelines and trademark policy:* Yes > (signed agreement); consulted with legal team when designing CWUG logo > - *Information about group published on a Wikimedia wiki:* Yes > - *Plans for activities or efforts to advance Wikimedia projects:* Yes > - *Allows new members:* Yes > - *Two designated contacts for Wikimedia Foundation:* Yes > - *Legally incorporated:* In progress > - *Amendable bylaws approved by Affiliations Committee:* CWUG has > bylaws > - *Two years of activities prior to applying:* Starting October 2011, > mostly monthly activities (36 meetups or events) in Seattle; Since January > 2012, Portland has had 30 meetups or events > - *Requires approval by Wikimedia Foundation Board: *WMF responsibility > - *Governing board elected by members, including new members:* Board > formed, election at end of first year (11/2015, if I am correct) > - *Activity and financial reports posted regularly on Meta-Wiki:* > Mission statement, goals, plans, & budget posted, reports coming at > appropriate intervals > > I do think that CWUG has done its due diligence thus far, given that we > have gone beyond the requirements of a user group & that we just recently > got the go ahead. > > Alex, > > I know that WMF has had some misgivings with the how chapters are working. > I can see at > https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Reports&oldid=11312318 that > 31% of the chapters & thematic reports are overdue on their reports. > (Bluerasberry & Pharos, if you are reading this, please light a fire under > Wikimedia New York City, because their report was due at the end of > October.) I know that some are years behind or just plain defunct. There > have been reports of one chapter in turmoil, having completely voted out > its board. I can understand why the Affiliations Committee is skittish > about new chapters & is encouraging groups to initially start as a user > group. > > However, even though "Wikimedia user groups are intended to be simple and > flexible affiliates", it is feeling a bit broken & anything but simple. I > know that Pine has submitted applications & documentation in a timely > manner, but the projected time for approval that was supposed to be 2 to 4 > weeks then stretched into months. The suddenness of the grantmaking > deadline was, well, unexpected. Had we gotten a more timely approval to > become a user group, we would have had more time to consult or have a > back-and-forth about the budget instead of feeling like we had to rush > headlong into it. And for a group that yearns to become a chapter, consider > how discouraging it is that the Step-by-step chapter creation guide > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Step-by-step_chapter_creation_guide&oldid=8213725> > begins with "This page is outdated ..." > > So please forgive us that even with you approach us with a legitimate > concern that we need to grow our membership at first, it feels to us like > another roadblock. Frankly, we just want to get to the point where we can > just start moving ahead as a user group with events, partnerships, member > recruiting, and reporting so we can further Wikipedia & the other Wikimedia > projects. This is the fifth board that II have served on, & I know that > while accounting & documentation are important, the thing that really > perpetuates an organization is serving its purpose & its members. Please > help us to expedite this process so we can turn our attention to that. > > Yours, > Peaceray > > On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Pine W <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Peaceray, >> >> I think that expanded membership and volunteer capacity is part of the >> picture, yes. >> >> One thing I think we should consider discussing with WMF at a fairly high >> level are the systematic problems we have been encountering with our >> group's formation and funding. We have had issues with Affcom delays, WMF >> Legal delays, Grantmaking springing a deadline on us related to the Inspire >> campaign, and now a need to reorient our annual plan based on expectations >> that do not appear to be documented on Meta (something that I confirmed >> with someone who is active in another chapter). I am starting to understand >> why chapters get so frustrated with WMF. My experience with WMF prior to >> this has never had such a series of speedbumps, and I would like to know if >> the Board would like me to address this series of issues that spans WMF >> departments with WMF's new Senior Director of Community Engagement, Luis >> Villa, who was recently promoted out of WMF's Legal department. Personally >> I am quite frustrated at the amount of volunteer time that is being >> expended in unproductive ways, and the systemic nature of the problems >> suggests to me that these issues need to be addressed by someone in WMF who >> is placed highly enough in the organization that they can streamline >> processes and address communication issues across departments. Please let >> me know if you would like me to set up a conversation with Luis. >> >> Pine >> >> Pine >> >> *This is an Encyclopedia* <https://www.wikipedia.org/> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *One gateway to the wide garden of knowledge, where lies The deep rock of >> our past, in which we must delve The well of our future,The clear water we >> must leave untainted for those who come after us,The fertile earth, in >> which truth may grow in bright places, tended by many hands,And the broad >> fall of sunshine, warming our first steps toward knowing how much we do not >> know.* >> >> *—Catherine Munro* >> >> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Raymond Leonard < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> I think that the "Comparison of requirements for affiliation models" >>> table in >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_user_groups/Requirements#eligibility >>> probably applies to the WMF's current perception of us. >>> >>> To the point of "our priority should be expanding the number and the >>> capacity of our volunteers," the rows at the head of the stable state that >>> the Minimum active Wikimedia editors & Suggested minimum members are 3 & 10 >>> respectively for a Wikimedia user groups and 10 & 20 respectively for both >>> Chapters & Thematic organizations. >>> >>> My takeaway from that page is that the easiest way to build credibility >>> with WMF is to grow our recognized membership beyond the board & to >>> implement "plans for activities or efforts to advance Wikimedia projects." >>> We already have folks beyond the board who have worked to do this. I think >>> our first step should be to enable & recruit them to join CWUG as members, >>> & then to engage them. >>> >>> Yours, >>> Peaceray >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Pine W <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Cascadians, >>>> >>>> I had a conversation about our draft annual plan with Alex this >>>> afternoon. >>>> >>>> Alex believes that at this point in our development, our priority >>>> should be expanding the number and the capacity of our volunteers, and that >>>> we are too early in our development for the temporary / part-time paid >>>> positions that we proposed in our budget. This means that our goals to >>>> develop institutional partnerships and to do outreach work must be >>>> significantly reduced in proportion to the capacity of our volunteer >>>> network. We know that we have many opportunities for partnerships and >>>> public engagement in the Cascadia region, and hopefully we will still be >>>> able to pursue those partnerships and engagement opportunities at a low >>>> intensity level that our volunteers can support in a sustainable way. >>>> Again, Alex believes that our first goal should be to expand our volunteer >>>> network. >>>> >>>> We will need to reorient our plans and our budget to focus on >>>> development and support of our volunteer network. I will work on redrafting >>>> the goals, calendar, plan and budget over the course of the next week, and >>>> have a conversation with Alex about the possible revisions next week. I >>>> have also asked Alex to create a learning pattern that describes the >>>> development path of organizations such as ours; I think that such a >>>> learning pattern would have been very helpful to us when we were first >>>> discussing our goals for this year. After the conversations with Alex have >>>> finished, I plan to re-engage with our Board to discuss the goals and >>>> funding that Alex and WMF feel that they are willing to support. >>>> >>>> I am cc'ing this email to Alex and hope that she will add any comments >>>> or clarifications that she has. It would probably be best to direct any >>>> questions or comments from Cascadians directly to Alex, preferably on this >>>> list so that others can benefit from the discussion. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Pine >>>> >>>> *This is an Encyclopedia* <https://www.wikipedia.org/> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *One gateway to the wide garden of knowledge, where lies The deep rock >>>> of our past, in which we must delve The well of our future,The clear water >>>> we must leave untainted for those who come after us,The fertile earth, in >>>> which truth may grow in bright places, tended by many hands,And the broad >>>> fall of sunshine, warming our first steps toward knowing how much we do not >>>> know.* >>>> >>>> *—Catherine Munro* >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia > >
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia
