Proposal talk:Work on developing a sustainable international structure

From Strategic Planning


Interesting proposal. Fully agree. The Foundation started implementation a few years ago. A chapters agreement has been set up, which contain most, if not all elements called for in the proposal. A separate fundraiser agreement is also being negotiated. Dedalus 09:08, 27 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Key questions very interesting

The key questions mentioned in the proposal are very interesting, and most of them unanswered (publicly). This ongoing strategic planning process is the time and place to look for answers to those questions. Dedalus 09:11, 27 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Impact?

Some proposals will have massive impact on end-users, including non-editors. Some will have minimal impact. What will be the impact of this proposal on our end-users? -- Philippe 00:20, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If donors are part of the end-users (which I believe), then the impact is quite important (a 4), because a sustainable international structure also means we're addressing the needs and wishes of the people who support us, if it only means readers, then a 2 is about right. The way I look at it, our supporters are also our readers. Delphine (notafish) 07:54, 14 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Creative Commons

This is the right place to discuss problems raised at the Wikimania 2009 panel on Wikimedia chapters. Creative Commons was mentioned as a good example: "they are an international organization, and they don't have legal entities in each country". Well, I'll speak for Italy: here, Creative Commons licenses are well known (Italy is one of the countries with more CC Works), and Creative Commons Italy is a legal entity: it is a sort of (pre-existant, if I remember correctly) "think thank" of University professors (not at all an association). And they had lots, lots of problems with the CC community: who should make decisions, administer the official website and mailing lists, etc. The result was: CC-Italy (self-appointed, I think) leaders have the last word on everything, the official mailing list is moderated, the community has a separate mailing list and website. This is to say: in Italy, bureaucratic requirements for legal associations are all about internal democracy: their aim is to defend members. If you don't have a legal entity, members don't have any "right". (Then, for tax exemption status you have some additional fiscal requirements, but this is a separate issue.) And that's why, as Manuel said, in Europe it's normal to create legal associations, even for a very small amount of members. Nemo 10:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]