Mailing List Archive: Wikipedia: Foundation

A new proposal regarding US chapters

1 2

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

wikimail at inbox

May 6, 2008, 8:30 AM

Post #1 of 27 (281 views)
Permalink

A new proposal regarding US chapters

On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 7:33 PM, Pharos <pharosofalexandria[at]gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Pharos <pharosofalexandria[at]gmail.com> wrote:
> > I propose that we promote Cary Bass to "Wikimedia US Affiliates
> > Coordinator", as an adjunct position to "Volunteer Coordinator" of the
> > WMF.
>
> I'd like to table this specific idea for now. It was built on the
> presumption that a "group exemption" would necessitate much closer
> cooperation of US chapters with the WMF.
>
Here's my current thoughts on the matter, after talking with you about
it privately. It's an attempt at a grassroots bottom-up strategy
(which both the WMF and the chapters-to-be seem to want) which at the
same time attempts to avoid constantly reinventing the wheel.

Since you have 15 months before you have to file for a determination
letter, go ahead and set up the organization and get running, but hold
off on the Form 1023.

Then, let's say 6 months down the road, hopefully there will be at
least 4 or 5 local US chapters in some process of forming, but without
a determination letter. At this point, each local chapter-to-be can
appoint one member to the board of a national organization (unless
there are too many, in which case some other election process can be
determined). The WMF will also appoint one or more board members
(presumably with the rule that these people cannot be employees or
board members of the WMF). The national organization will exist with
a mission solely to help form and oversee local US chapters. It will
approve bylaws and articles of association/incorporation (there can be
templates for this), it will act as a liason with chap com, etc. It
will *not* participate in any direct volunteer efforts, but would act
in a general supervisory capacity. This organization can then apply
as the parent organization and get a group exemption for all the local
organizations.

Individual local chapters will get their trademark permissions
directly from the WMF. The national organization will have no rights
to give these permissions directly, though it will of course assist in
communications between the local organizations and the WMF. Meetings
of the national organization will be held online and/or through
teleconferencing, to keep the costs down to a minimum. Each local
organization will be responsible to keep its own set of books, and
will submit financial statements to the national organization on a
regular basis (at least quarterly). Local organizations will report
their activities to the national organization. Local chapters will be
responsible for their own federal, state, and local taxes/tax returns.

Local chapters will kick up a small portion of their membership dues
to the national organization. The national organization will use this
for any administrative costs, and, optionally to help subsidize new
local chapters just getting started up. Any payments from the local
chapters to the WMF will go direct, not through the national
organization. Every attempt will be made to keep the national
organization bare-bones as to expenses and revenues. No Wikimania USA
funded by the national organization, if the chapters want that they
can get the WMF to do it or can form a Wikimania USA Inc. No travel
expenses. No servers. No public relations staff or consultants.
Members of the local chapters should be the first point of contact for
any necessary expertise. Any national press inquiries will be
directed to the WMF.

What does everyone think?

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

sebmol at gmail

May 6, 2008, 8:36 AM

Post #2 of 27 (275 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 5:30 PM, Anthony <wikimail[at]inbox.org> wrote:

> Local chapters will kick up a small portion of their membership dues
> to the national organization. The national organization will use this
> for any administrative costs, and, optionally to help subsidize new
> local chapters just getting started up. Any payments from the local
> chapters to the WMF will go direct, not through the national
> organization. Every attempt will be made to keep the national
> organization bare-bones as to expenses and revenues. No Wikimania USA
> funded by the national organization, if the chapters want that they
> can get the WMF to do it or can form a Wikimania USA Inc. No travel
> expenses. No servers. No public relations staff or consultants.
> Members of the local chapters should be the first point of contact for
> any necessary expertise. Any national press inquiries will be
> directed to the WMF.
>

I don't yet clearly see the benefit of this being a separate organization as
opposed to having someone at the foundation dedicated to this sort of work.

Sebastian
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

h.schlottmann at gmx

May 6, 2008, 9:38 AM

Post #3 of 27 (275 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

Anthony wrote:

> Here's my current thoughts on the matter, after talking with you about
> it privately. It's an attempt at a grassroots bottom-up strategy
> (which both the WMF and the chapters-to-be seem to want) which at the
> same time attempts to avoid constantly reinventing the wheel.

I don't see the beef. The United States don't need a number of local
chapters, they need one national chapter to provide for a membership
organization associated with the Wikimedia Foundation. Local groups can
form under the national umbrella without being incorporated themselves.

Get the organizers of all local meetups, the Pennsylvanians, the New
Yorkers and everyone else who ever made some steps to chapterhood
together on a mailing list, ask around if one of the Wikipedians
involved is a lawyer who can handle any questions, choose a state where
to incorporate the chapter (based on locality of a few core members and
the answers of your lawyer) and set up the chapter. That's not rocket
science. Wikipedians usually are smart people, you should be able to get
it done without any problems.

You need a charter, send it to the Foundation to have it approved, send
it to the state office to have it registered, and that's about it.

Henning [[user:H-stt]]

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

swatjester at gmail

May 6, 2008, 10:09 AM

Post #4 of 27 (275 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

Exactly what I've been thinking Anthony.

-dan
On May 6, 2008, at 11:30 AM, Anthony wrote:

> On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 7:33 PM, Pharos
> <pharosofalexandria[at]gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Pharos
>> <pharosofalexandria[at]gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I propose that we promote Cary Bass to "Wikimedia US Affiliates
>>> Coordinator", as an adjunct position to "Volunteer Coordinator" of
>>> the
>>> WMF.
>>
>> I'd like to table this specific idea for now. It was built on the
>> presumption that a "group exemption" would necessitate much closer
>> cooperation of US chapters with the WMF.
>>
> Here's my current thoughts on the matter, after talking with you about
> it privately. It's an attempt at a grassroots bottom-up strategy
> (which both the WMF and the chapters-to-be seem to want) which at the
> same time attempts to avoid constantly reinventing the wheel.
>
> Since you have 15 months before you have to file for a determination
> letter, go ahead and set up the organization and get running, but hold
> off on the Form 1023.
>
> Then, let's say 6 months down the road, hopefully there will be at
> least 4 or 5 local US chapters in some process of forming, but without
> a determination letter. At this point, each local chapter-to-be can
> appoint one member to the board of a national organization (unless
> there are too many, in which case some other election process can be
> determined). The WMF will also appoint one or more board members
> (presumably with the rule that these people cannot be employees or
> board members of the WMF). The national organization will exist with
> a mission solely to help form and oversee local US chapters. It will
> approve bylaws and articles of association/incorporation (there can be
> templates for this), it will act as a liason with chap com, etc. It
> will *not* participate in any direct volunteer efforts, but would act
> in a general supervisory capacity. This organization can then apply
> as the parent organization and get a group exemption for all the local
> organizations.
>
> Individual local chapters will get their trademark permissions
> directly from the WMF. The national organization will have no rights
> to give these permissions directly, though it will of course assist in
> communications between the local organizations and the WMF. Meetings
> of the national organization will be held online and/or through
> teleconferencing, to keep the costs down to a minimum. Each local
> organization will be responsible to keep its own set of books, and
> will submit financial statements to the national organization on a
> regular basis (at least quarterly). Local organizations will report
> their activities to the national organization. Local chapters will be
> responsible for their own federal, state, and local taxes/tax returns.
>
> Local chapters will kick up a small portion of their membership dues
> to the national organization. The national organization will use this
> for any administrative costs, and, optionally to help subsidize new
> local chapters just getting started up. Any payments from the local
> chapters to the WMF will go direct, not through the national
> organization. Every attempt will be made to keep the national
> organization bare-bones as to expenses and revenues. No Wikimania USA
> funded by the national organization, if the chapters want that they
> can get the WMF to do it or can form a Wikimania USA Inc. No travel
> expenses. No servers. No public relations staff or consultants.
> Members of the local chapters should be the first point of contact for
> any necessary expertise. Any national press inquiries will be
> directed to the WMF.
>
> What does everyone think?
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

swatjester at gmail

May 6, 2008, 10:14 AM

Post #5 of 27 (276 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

No, the US does not need one national chapter. This has been gone over
time and again. Anthony's strategy provides for a guiding body to
oversee the local chapters (something that takes too much time and
effort for the foundation to do, and also something they must be
separate from for liability reasons), but keeps the emphasis on the
local chapters, to conduct local events and local outreach, something
that they can do far better than any national chapter, while national
stuff can be reserved for the WMF to handle. The national guiding body
also simplifies the issue of the US local chapters candidates for the
2 board seats.

It sounds great to me.

-Dan

On May 6, 2008, at 12:38 PM, Henning Schlottmann wrote:

> Anthony wrote:
>
>> Here's my current thoughts on the matter, after talking with you
>> about
>> it privately. It's an attempt at a grassroots bottom-up strategy
>> (which both the WMF and the chapters-to-be seem to want) which at the
>> same time attempts to avoid constantly reinventing the wheel.
>
> I don't see the beef. The United States don't need a number of local
> chapters, they need one national chapter to provide for a membership
> organization associated with the Wikimedia Foundation. Local groups
> can
> form under the national umbrella without being incorporated
> themselves.
>
> Get the organizers of all local meetups, the Pennsylvanians, the New
> Yorkers and everyone else who ever made some steps to chapterhood
> together on a mailing list, ask around if one of the Wikipedians
> involved is a lawyer who can handle any questions, choose a state
> where
> to incorporate the chapter (based on locality of a few core members
> and
> the answers of your lawyer) and set up the chapter. That's not rocket
> science. Wikipedians usually are smart people, you should be able to
> get
> it done without any problems.
>
> You need a charter, send it to the Foundation to have it approved,
> send
> it to the state office to have it registered, and that's about it.
>
> Henning [[user:H-stt]]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

birgitte_sb at yahoo

May 6, 2008, 10:26 AM

Post #6 of 27 (276 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

--- On Tue, 5/6/08, Henning Schlottmann <h.schlottmann[at]gmx.net> wrote:

> From: Henning Schlottmann <h.schlottmann[at]gmx.net>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] A new proposal regarding US chapters
> To: foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
> Date: Tuesday, May 6, 2008, 11:38 AM
> Anthony wrote:
>
> > Here's my current thoughts on the matter, after
> talking with you about
> > it privately. It's an attempt at a grassroots
> bottom-up strategy
> > (which both the WMF and the chapters-to-be seem to
> want) which at the
> > same time attempts to avoid constantly reinventing the
> wheel.
>
> I don't see the beef. The United States don't need
> a number of local
> chapters, they need one national chapter to provide for a
> membership
> organization associated with the Wikimedia Foundation.
>
>

Why again do they need a one national chapter? Since none of the grass-roots organizers see a need, this is far from obvious.

Birgitte

____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

wknight8111 at gmail

May 6, 2008, 10:32 AM

Post #7 of 27 (274 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 1:14 PM, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester[at]gmail.com> wrote:
> No, the US does not need one national chapter. This has been gone over
> time and again. Anthony's strategy provides for a guiding body to
> oversee the local chapters (something that takes too much time and
> effort for the foundation to do, and also something they must be
> separate from for liability reasons), but keeps the emphasis on the
> local chapters, to conduct local events and local outreach, something
> that they can do far better than any national chapter, while national
> stuff can be reserved for the WMF to handle. The national guiding body
> also simplifies the issue of the US local chapters candidates for the
> 2 board seats.

The existence of a "virtual" national chapter, a chapter that exists
as a hollow shell of sorts, would enable state- and locally-based
groups to qualify for 503(c) status under a group exemption. Putting
this kind of parent/child structure in place now would be helpful if
we decided to move towards a more nationally-organized structure in
the future (which might not be entirely unlikely).

I'm not necessarily advocating this, just showing it as a way in which
the existence of a US national chapter might be nice, even if it's not
strictly necessary.

--Andrew Whitworth

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

birgitte_sb at yahoo

May 6, 2008, 10:35 AM

Post #8 of 27 (273 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

--- On Tue, 5/6/08, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester[at]gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Dan Rosenthal <swatjester[at]gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] A new proposal regarding US chapters
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org>
> Date: Tuesday, May 6, 2008, 12:14 PM

Anthony's strategy provides for a
> guiding body to
> oversee the local chapters (something that takes too much
> time and
> effort for the foundation to do, and also something they
> must be
> separate from for liability reasons), but keeps the
> emphasis on the
> local chapters, to conduct local events and local outreach,
> something
> that they can do far better than any national chapter,
> while national
> stuff can be reserved for the WMF to handle. The national
> guiding body
> also simplifies the issue of the US local chapters
> candidates for the
> 2 board seats.

I am not sure I understand the need the bare-bones national structure (ignoring the issue of baord seats). What does having it allow to happen that cannot happen without it?

Regarding board seats, I think it is silly to design something around this issue until *after* a selection process is approved. It could be possibly arranged in a way that makes no differnce how many chapters are in the US or not.

Birgitte SB

____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

swatjester at gmail

May 6, 2008, 10:42 AM

Post #9 of 27 (273 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

Exactly. To whit, Anthony's "virtual" national chapter, or similar
"shell chapter" kind of ideas are one of the few kinds of national
chapter that I would personally support.

-Dan
On May 6, 2008, at 1:32 PM, Andrew Whitworth wrote:

> On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 1:14 PM, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester[at]gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> No, the US does not need one national chapter. This has been gone
>> over
>> time and again. Anthony's strategy provides for a guiding body to
>> oversee the local chapters (something that takes too much time and
>> effort for the foundation to do, and also something they must be
>> separate from for liability reasons), but keeps the emphasis on the
>> local chapters, to conduct local events and local outreach, something
>> that they can do far better than any national chapter, while national
>> stuff can be reserved for the WMF to handle. The national guiding
>> body
>> also simplifies the issue of the US local chapters candidates for the
>> 2 board seats.
>
> The existence of a "virtual" national chapter, a chapter that exists
> as a hollow shell of sorts, would enable state- and locally-based
> groups to qualify for 503(c) status under a group exemption. Putting
> this kind of parent/child structure in place now would be helpful if
> we decided to move towards a more nationally-organized structure in
> the future (which might not be entirely unlikely).
>
> I'm not necessarily advocating this, just showing it as a way in which
> the existence of a US national chapter might be nice, even if it's not
> strictly necessary.
>
> --Andrew Whitworth
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

jwales at wikia

May 6, 2008, 10:54 AM

Post #10 of 27 (273 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

I don't find this line of thought compelling at all. There is no need
for a separate legal national organization, and indeed this would be
confusing and counter-productive.

I can see an argument for US chapters not need a legal organization at
all (just use the Foundation for this), and I can see an argument for
each of them having their own legal organization (this seems better to
me), but I can't see having one non-Foundation organization for multiple
chapters.

Henning Schlottmann wrote:
> Anthony wrote:
>
>> Here's my current thoughts on the matter, after talking with you about
>> it privately. It's an attempt at a grassroots bottom-up strategy
>> (which both the WMF and the chapters-to-be seem to want) which at the
>> same time attempts to avoid constantly reinventing the wheel.
>
> I don't see the beef. The United States don't need a number of local
> chapters, they need one national chapter to provide for a membership
> organization associated with the Wikimedia Foundation. Local groups can
> form under the national umbrella without being incorporated themselves.
>
> Get the organizers of all local meetups, the Pennsylvanians, the New
> Yorkers and everyone else who ever made some steps to chapterhood
> together on a mailing list, ask around if one of the Wikipedians
> involved is a lawyer who can handle any questions, choose a state where
> to incorporate the chapter (based on locality of a few core members and
> the answers of your lawyer) and set up the chapter. That's not rocket
> science. Wikipedians usually are smart people, you should be able to get
> it done without any problems.
>
> You need a charter, send it to the Foundation to have it approved, send
> it to the state office to have it registered, and that's about it.
>
> Henning [[user:H-stt]]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

wknight8111 at gmail

May 6, 2008, 11:09 AM

Post #11 of 27 (273 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 1:54 PM, Jimmy Wales <jwales[at]wikia.com> wrote:
> I don't find this line of thought compelling at all. There is no need
> for a separate legal national organization, and indeed this would be
> confusing and counter-productive.
>
> I can see an argument for US chapters not need a legal organization at
> all (just use the Foundation for this), and I can see an argument for
> each of them having their own legal organization (this seems better to
> me), but I can't see having one non-Foundation organization for multiple
> chapters.

It's never a problem to have too many options! The volunteers are
going to organize as they see fit, we can't do too much to script them
and I don't think we would even want to if we could. Likewise, the
volunteers can't force the WMF to act in any particular way either. We
have the four basic options available, at different levels of
preference for different people:
1) The WMF is the "parent" to the US local chapters
2) A strong "Wikimedia US" chapter is formed in the US, and local
groups serve as "local sections" of this strong chapter
3) A weak "Wikimedia US" chapter shell is formed to provide a legal
framework for independent local sections
4) Local sections/chapters form independently and incorporate
individually as non-profits, no national chapter whatsoever

Depending on the way that organization progresses on both sides of the
coin (the volunteers and the WMF), any of these options may come into
or fall out of favor. For instance, if we have several fledgling
chapters forming, and all of them are having difficulties
incorporating as non-profits, options 1 or 3 might be more
interesting. If volunteers decide spontaneously to combine efforts
because of inherent similarities, option 2 might be preferred. It's
good to have the options on the table and let people work towards
their desired ends more organically.

--Andrew Whitworth

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

swatjester at gmail

May 6, 2008, 11:25 AM

Post #12 of 27 (273 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

Exactly. We need to let the local chapters form and develop first, see
how they interact and what their needs are, before any real decisions
on a US chapter are necessary.

-Dan

On May 6, 2008, at 2:09 PM, Andrew Whitworth wrote:

>
> Depending on the way that organization progresses on both sides of the
> coin (the volunteers and the WMF), any of these options may come into
> or fall out of favor. For instance, if we have several fledgling
> chapters forming, and all of them are having difficulties
> incorporating as non-profits, options 1 or 3 might be more
> interesting. If volunteers decide spontaneously to combine efforts
> because of inherent similarities, option 2 might be preferred. It's
> good to have the options on the table and let people work towards
> their desired ends more organically.
>
> --Andrew Whitworth

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

lars at aronsson

May 6, 2008, 12:18 PM

Post #13 of 27 (273 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

Jimmy Wales wrote:

> I can see an argument for US chapters not need a legal
> organization at all (just use the Foundation for this), and I
> can see an argument for each of them having their own legal
> organization (this seems better to me), but I can't see having
> one non-Foundation organization for multiple chapters.

The Internet Society (www.isoc.org) has 19 chapters in Africa, 28
chapters in Europe (one in Germany, one in France, one in Sweden,
... two in Belgium, and six in Spain), and 10 chapters in North
America (one for Canada, one for Quebec, and one each for Chicago,
Los Angeles, New Jersey, New York, Washington DC, Philadelphia,
Texas, and Colorado). I think such a flexible model could serve
the Wikimedia Foundation as well. The odd fact that Belgium has
two chapters (one is for Wallonia) doesn't force every state of
Germany to have its own. It's not like every little county or
township will set up its own chapter. The ISOC has less than 100
chapters in all.

http://isoc.org/isoc/chapters/

--
Lars Aronsson (lars[at]aronsson.se)
Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

wikimail at inbox

May 6, 2008, 12:34 PM

Post #14 of 27 (274 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 1:54 PM, Jimmy Wales <jwales[at]wikia.com> wrote:
> I can see an argument for US chapters not need a legal organization at
> all (just use the Foundation for this),

I've yet to see a reasonable proposal from the Foundation as to how
that would work. Does the Foundation intend to take on the liability
for the real world actions of volunteers around the country? If
someone gets injured at a New York City chapter meeting due to the
negligence of the meeting organizers, is the WMF gonna cover the
medical bills?

> and I can see an argument for
> each of them having their own legal organization (this seems better to
> me),

It's certainly better. But there's a lot of paperwork involved.

> but I can't see having one non-Foundation organization for multiple
> chapters.
>

Well, fortunately, this isn't something for you to decide. If the
chapters are going to have their own legal organizations, and the WMF
(via Mike Godwin) insists that they are not "considered to be part of
WMF in any respect", then it's for the chapters to decide how to
organize themselves.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

birgitte_sb at yahoo

May 6, 2008, 12:51 PM

Post #15 of 27 (273 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

--- On Tue, 5/6/08, Anthony <wikimail[at]inbox.org> wrote:

> From: Anthony <wikimail[at]inbox.org>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] A new proposal regarding US chapters
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org>
> Date: Tuesday, May 6, 2008, 2:34 PM
> On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 1:54 PM, Jimmy Wales
> <jwales[at]wikia.com> wrote:>
> > and I can see an argument for
> > each of them having their own legal organization
> (this seems better to
> > me),
>
> It's certainly better. But there's a lot of
> paperwork involved.

Is ther really that much less paperwork than what is required to have elections for a national board? Is the risk of sharing liabilty between the responsible group in X and foolish group in Y worth it less paperwork for X? What if some group wants to do the paperwork and only be responsible for the actions their group takes; will they be forced to join in the national scheme?

Birgitte SB

____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

wikimail at inbox

May 6, 2008, 12:55 PM

Post #16 of 27 (274 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Henning Schlottmann
<h.schlottmann[at]gmx.net> wrote:
> Get the organizers of all local meetups, the Pennsylvanians, the New
> Yorkers and everyone else who ever made some steps to chapterhood
> together on a mailing list, ask around if one of the Wikipedians
> involved is a lawyer who can handle any questions, choose a state where
> to incorporate the chapter (based on locality of a few core members and
> the answers of your lawyer) and set up the chapter. That's not rocket
> science. Wikipedians usually are smart people, you should be able to get
> it done without any problems.
>
I think you need to look at what's currently being done by Wikimedia
New York City. They have a couple dozen or more people interested to
some extent in forming a chapter, they've appointed an interim
president, they've run a "scavenger hunt and free content photography
contest", they're looking into a project for the "digitization of the
CYCO Yiddish Encyclopedia", and they've "had preliminary discussions
about a free content photography contest at the Brooklyn Museum".
They've had numerous speakers at their meetings, and they have their
next live in-person meeting scheduled for June 1, 2008.

They've got well enough support for a chapter. Telling them set up a
mailing list and invite other people from around the United States in
order to get this chapter formed doesn't make any sense. I bet at
least half the people who will show up at that June 1 meeting wouldn't
even read the mailing list, let alone participate on it.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

swatjester at gmail

May 6, 2008, 1:30 PM

Post #17 of 27 (273 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

And more importantly, from what I understand, the New Yorkers don't
necessarily want to go through the process of formally incorporating
and such. In contrast, I understand that the Penn chapter does want
to, and I've yet to speak to anyone in the DC working group that does
not want to incorporate. Why would we force the chapters that don't
want to incorporate to do so, or force the chapters who do want to
incorporate not to do so, to satisfy some unwieldy nationwide body?

The concept of a national guiding body, consisting of the boards or
presidents (or other senior members) of the local chapters, existing
for the purpose of those rare times the US local chapters need to
operate in unison, is a good one. It works when it is needed to, and
other than that it stays out of the local chapters way and lets them
do their work in the manner that the local chapters find most
efficient and best for them, and it can serve to mediate conflicts
between the chapters if necessary. So basically, it's an ideal form of
government.

-Dan
On May 6, 2008, at 3:55 PM, Anthony wrote:

> On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Henning Schlottmann
> <h.schlottmann[at]gmx.net> wrote:
>> Get the organizers of all local meetups, the Pennsylvanians, the New
>> Yorkers and everyone else who ever made some steps to chapterhood
>> together on a mailing list, ask around if one of the Wikipedians
>> involved is a lawyer who can handle any questions, choose a state
>> where
>> to incorporate the chapter (based on locality of a few core members
>> and
>> the answers of your lawyer) and set up the chapter. That's not rocket
>> science. Wikipedians usually are smart people, you should be able
>> to get
>> it done without any problems.
>>
> I think you need to look at what's currently being done by Wikimedia
> New York City. They have a couple dozen or more people interested to
> some extent in forming a chapter, they've appointed an interim
> president, they've run a "scavenger hunt and free content photography
> contest", they're looking into a project for the "digitization of the
> CYCO Yiddish Encyclopedia", and they've "had preliminary discussions
> about a free content photography contest at the Brooklyn Museum".
> They've had numerous speakers at their meetings, and they have their
> next live in-person meeting scheduled for June 1, 2008.
>
> They've got well enough support for a chapter. Telling them set up a
> mailing list and invite other people from around the United States in
> order to get this chapter formed doesn't make any sense. I bet at
> least half the people who will show up at that June 1 meeting wouldn't
> even read the mailing list, let alone participate on it.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

h.schlottmann at gmx

May 6, 2008, 1:37 PM

Post #18 of 27 (273 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

Anthony wrote:
[NYC]

> They've got well enough support for a chapter. Telling them set up a
> mailing list and invite other people from around the United States in
> order to get this chapter formed doesn't make any sense. I bet at
> least half the people who will show up at that June 1 meeting wouldn't
> even read the mailing list, let alone participate on it.

If NYC is the frontrunner, then have them set up /the/ national chapter
for the United States. I don't understand why anyone would want to have
several incorporated chapters in the USA. One should be enough. All
local or regional activities can happen under that umbrella.

Henning

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

h.schlottmann at gmx

May 6, 2008, 1:47 PM

Post #19 of 27 (273 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

Jimmy Wales wrote:
> I don't find this line of thought compelling at all. There is no need
> for a separate legal national organization, and indeed this would be
> confusing and counter-productive.
>
> I can see an argument for US chapters not need a legal organization at
> all (just use the Foundation for this), and I can see an argument for
> each of them having their own legal organization (this seems better to
> me), but I can't see having one non-Foundation organization for multiple
> chapters.

I see a wish for and some advantages of a membership organization. The
Foundation can't be that, as it is international in scope and
international membership is not feasible.

But I don't understand why anyone would want to have several
incorporated chapters in one nation if one could be the umbrella for all
local and regional activities. Is this a control issue? A 'not invented
here' issue? Why shouldn't Pennsylvania be the regional (unincorporated)
organization of a national chapter, incorporated in NYC? Or the other way?

Be smart. Think before you act, or there might be half a dozen
incorporated chapters on US soil within a few months - and in two years
most of them might fail, because their base is not large enough to find
board members, they started uncoordinated projects and can't cover the
expenses and so on.

Henning

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

cbrown1023.ml at gmail

May 6, 2008, 2:08 PM

Post #20 of 27 (274 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 4:37 PM, Henning Schlottmann
<h.schlottmann[at]gmx.net> wrote:
> If NYC is the frontrunner, then have them set up /the/ national chapter
> for the United States. I don't understand why anyone would want to have
> several incorporated chapters in the USA. One should be enough. All
> local or regional activities can happen under that umbrella.
>

It's not that easy. Pennsylvania/Philadelphia were actually the first
ones interested in becoming a "chapter" and now we have Washington,
D.C. that is interested in creating a chapter as well.

--
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023

---
Note: This e-mail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent to
this address will probably get lost.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

wikimail at inbox

May 6, 2008, 2:20 PM

Post #21 of 27 (273 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 4:37 PM, Henning Schlottmann
<h.schlottmann[at]gmx.net> wrote:
> Anthony wrote:
> > They've got well enough support for a chapter. Telling them set up a
> > mailing list and invite other people from around the United States in
> > order to get this chapter formed doesn't make any sense. I bet at
> > least half the people who will show up at that June 1 meeting wouldn't
> > even read the mailing list, let alone participate on it.
>
> If NYC is the frontrunner, then have them set up /the/ national chapter
> for the United States. I don't understand why anyone would want to have
> several incorporated chapters in the USA. One should be enough. All
> local or regional activities can happen under that umbrella.
>
First of all, I never said the local chapters had to be incorporated.
They'll probably want to be, but if they really want to save the $70
or so and organize as unincorporated associations, that's their
prerogative. They should understand though that once their
unincorporated association starts collecting money, incorporated or
not, they have to account for that money, file tax returns, and do
pretty much all the other tasks that incorporated organizations have
to do.

But frankly I don't even understand what you mean by having all local
or regional activities under a single umbrella. If I, in Tampa, want
to run a "scavenger hunt and free content photography contest", why
should this be organized by someone in New York City? Do I get a
checking account here in Tampa to buy the refreshments, or do I have
them send me a check from New York City? I guess I have to have a
checking account, because when someone donates $10 in cash towards the
event, I'm not sending the cash through the mail, and I'm not buying a
money order or sending it Western Union. I guess I could put it all
under my pillow. Let's hope all of it gets spent on project funds,
cause there's no way some bureaucrat in New York City is going to
figure out if it doesn't. After all, the national organization, run
out of New York City, has to appoint me as an officer, so that I can
have checkwriting privileges. And most likely without even having met
me.

How does any of that make sense? Shouldn't those of us in Tampa
decide these things? Shouldn't the local donors decide who is most
trustworthy to entrust with their money, and shouldn't they have at
least the opportunity to meet with the people in charge in person?
Are the board members all going to be from New York City, or are we
going to send the board members on planes all over the country so they
can have their board meetings? Or maybe we'll just do everything by
email, I'm sure that'll *really* facilitate working together.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

swatjester at gmail

May 6, 2008, 2:24 PM

Post #22 of 27 (269 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

According to the Wikinortheast blog, there are quite a few other
locations that are stirring, and may begin the development process as
well.

-Dan
On May 6, 2008, at 5:08 PM, Casey Brown wrote:

> On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 4:37 PM, Henning Schlottmann
> <h.schlottmann[at]gmx.net> wrote:
>> If NYC is the frontrunner, then have them set up /the/ national
>> chapter
>> for the United States. I don't understand why anyone would want to
>> have
>> several incorporated chapters in the USA. One should be enough. All
>> local or regional activities can happen under that umbrella.
>>
>
> It's not that easy. Pennsylvania/Philadelphia were actually the first
> ones interested in becoming a "chapter" and now we have Washington,
> D.C. that is interested in creating a chapter as well.
>
> --
> Casey Brown
> Cbrown1023
>
> ---
> Note: This e-mail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails
> sent to
> this address will probably get lost.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

wikimail at inbox

May 6, 2008, 2:26 PM

Post #23 of 27 (269 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 5:08 PM, Casey Brown <cbrown1023.ml[at]gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 4:37 PM, Henning Schlottmann
>
> <h.schlottmann[at]gmx.net> wrote:
>
> > If NYC is the frontrunner, then have them set up /the/ national chapter
> > for the United States. I don't understand why anyone would want to have
> > several incorporated chapters in the USA. One should be enough. All
> > local or regional activities can happen under that umbrella.
> >
>
> It's not that easy. Pennsylvania/Philadelphia were actually the first
> ones interested in becoming a "chapter" and now we have Washington,
> D.C. that is interested in creating a chapter as well.
>
Moreover, the PA folks have indicated that they're interested in
forming an organization whether the WMF is going to go along with them
or not. So if you don't allow a Wikimedia Pennsylvania, or you try to
micromanage Wikimedia Pennsylvania from some other location, you'll
wind up with a "Wikis in PA". To quote wknight8111, "We were going to
call it "Wikimedia Pennsylvania" or whatever, but if we can't use that
name we will call it something else".

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

tim at tim-landscheidt

May 6, 2008, 3:46 PM

Post #24 of 27 (269 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

Anthony <wikimail[at]inbox.org> wrote:

> [...]
> But frankly I don't even understand what you mean by having all local
> or regional activities under a single umbrella. If I, in Tampa, want
> to run a "scavenger hunt and free content photography contest", why
> should this be organized by someone in New York City? Do I get a
> checking account here in Tampa to buy the refreshments, or do I have
> them send me a check from New York City? I guess I have to have a
> checking account, because when someone donates $10 in cash towards the
> event, I'm not sending the cash through the mail, and I'm not buying a
> money order or sending it Western Union. I guess I could put it all
> under my pillow. Let's hope all of it gets spent on project funds,
> cause there's no way some bureaucrat in New York City is going to
> figure out if it doesn't. After all, the national organization, run
> out of New York City, has to appoint me as an officer, so that I can
> have checkwriting privileges. And most likely without even having met
> me.
> [...]

In Germany (and probably in the SEPA at large), transferring
money seems to be a lot easier (and cheaper) than in the US.
And most members of an organization regularly put up front
minor expenses (for refreshments, etc.) and have them reim-
bursed later on. That makes it difficult for foreigners
where checks are something your grandparents tell you about
to grasp the intricacies of founding US chapter(s).

So, hats off to those who succeed!

Tim

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

cimonavaro at gmail

May 6, 2008, 7:33 PM

Post #25 of 27 (264 views)
Permalink

Re: A new proposal regarding US chapters [In reply to]

1 2

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact lists@gossamer-threads.com