I think the Chapter should consider why it's membership base is so low. I would
suggest that the Chapter undertake a membership drive after the elections and
use the same to understand why the Community members are not becoming members
of the Chapter. I believe this would be an instructive exercise for the Chapter.
I have remained member of the Chapter for these many years believing that the
Chapter represented the Community. In the last few weeks many community members
I knew are not members of the Chapter. I also learnt that the number of people
eligible to vote in this election stands at 30 members and that the whole
membership list has about 130 members. The other 100 members are ineligible to
vote since they joined in April or so. Many members also failed to renew their
I have resigned from membership of the Chapter and will only join again when
*I* believe that the Chapter is representative of the Community.
I have been labelled an anarchist and as an often-quitter. I think the
Wikimedia movement is anarchistic in its very nature. I am an often-quitter
too. So, I do not deny these charges. I say what I think I have to say. You all
have the choice of choosing to listen to it or not. I do not take that freedom
away from you and I thank you for the freedom you grant an anarchist and an
Sent from my iPhone
> On 09-Sep-2014, at 15:12, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok.. so explain to me why the chapter is not able to provide funding for
> viable projects. Do remember that the qualifiers for funding are essentially
> the same; they have to pass the requirements of the WMF. When the chapter has
> its own independent funding, it can allocate as it sees fit.
> I seriously do not understand what drives you. I only notice negative
> attitudes, I do not understand how you think a chapter should/could operate.
> The only thing I notice is how you blame others for the woes of the Indian
> chapter and as a consequence attack and thereby destroy opportunities that
> become lost for now for India,
>> On 8 September 2014 15:22, Ravishankar <ravidre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> * Chapter, user groups and online wikimedia project communities need not be
>> mutually exclusive.
>> * A user group need not be created just for the sake of it without clear
>> idea of the problem that it intends to solve and which cannot be solved by
>> other already available means.
>> For example, forming a Tamil Wikimedia user group in SriLanka will make
>> sense as we have legal and financial restrictions of spending India
>> chapter's money in other countries. But, there is no need felt to start a
>> Tamil Wikimedia user group in Tamilnadu.
>> Will a global Tamil user group like
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Esperanto_kaj_Libera_Scio help?
>> May be. But, it isn't a pressing need. Whenever we come up with a project or
>> grant request, it is well supported already by WMF and Wikimedia India.
>> Please also note that for a country like India, a registered and legal
>> entity like chapter is very essential. Because, without a letter pad and
>> official seal, we can't enter many places. And without such entities, we
>> can't conduct mega projects with big budgets (Individuals who receive money
>> on behalf of communities or user groups will face tax audit issues. And the
>> process needs to be repeatedly done every time by a new individual)
>> * A user group will help when they operate across multiple projects and
>> regions. For example, GLAM volunteers and Mediawiki hackers. But, I see this
>> as a convenience as to organize the volunteers themselves formally than as a
>> requirement to operate outside other entities like chapter, especially when
>> they are willing to support them.
>> * Please note that many of the current and waiting to be approved user
>> groups are just incubators for future chapters. We will be going backwards
>> if we dissolve the chapter and split into user groups.
>> * Yes, Wikimedia India chapter could have fared better. But, I wouldn't
>> blame it or any single person or EC. Like any Wikimedia project, it can only
>> become better with more participation, collaboration and emergence of
>> natural leadership. For a complex country like India, it will take time. 7
>> members of EC are not super humans and they are not supposed to do all the
>> work by themselves. Any such expectation set by themselves or from the
>> members should be reconsidered. In my personal experience interacting with
>> the chapter, they have always supported us in all ways possible. Only if the
>> chapter stands in the way of any aspiring member / community's plan, it
>> should be highlighted and discussed.
>> * The chapter is already as democratic as it could be by design. In fact,
>> most of it's problems stem from that and not because of lack of democracy.
>> Other players in the movement like WMF or their working partners like CIS
>> don't have this issue while chapters have to face this issue. So, it is
>> unfair to judge chapter's performance without considering this crucial
>> * Whatever be the structural setup we might agree, it is not going to solve
>> all issues. We need to think with it and also outside the box.
>> * I am surprised that no one highlighted the impact of non-community
>> organizations like CIS in the movement.
>> Once, I asked an active Indian Wikimedian who initiated many chapter events
>> and then started collaborating with CIS, why he made this transition.
>> His answer:
>> "Chapter doesn't give us money. CIS gives money".
>> And there you see, how in the name of language community strategy of WMF
>> through CIS has bifurcated the community.
>> This, in my view, is a bigger issue that needs to be addressed.
>> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
>> To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit