> Being a member of a company (and in future a member of a charity) > will bring a certain responsibility, which some may find is not what > they want.
Technical point: Wiki UK Ltd. is a charity now - a charity is defined as a non-profit company with charitable objects. Registration is not required to be a charity, just to be a "registered charity". That's not important, though. I agree people should have the option of supporting us without the responsibility (however small) that goes along with membership of a company, however it should be up to them, not anyone else. > A company with 1,000 members will be hard to manage. However, a > company with 100 members and 1,000 friends will be much easier to > keep running. I don't see anything particularly hard to manage with a 1000 members company. Most people won't attend the AGMs and will vote by proxy. If a significant number do attend the AGM then it would need to be run a little more formally, a show of hands isn't likely to work for anything but the most uncontroversial resolutions, but that's not too difficult. I don't see how you can disenfranchise 90% of the membership just for convenience, it goes completely against the democratic ideals of the chapter. > I believe most people would want to be a "friend" rather than a > "member", and I mean "member" in the technical sense of "guarantor > member". At this point, you're just guessing. The lists of people interested in being guarantor and supporting members were pretty similar in length. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
