On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 14:31, James Salsman
<jsalsman@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Guillaume Paumier <guillom.pom@gmail.com> wrote:
>...
> You should only consider going creating a chapter *now* if, after
> thoughtful consideration, you come to the conclusion that a chapter is
> the best way to move forward with what you want to accomplish.
> Identify the issues first, then think if a chapter is the best
> solution to solve these issues. I would suggest to make a list on
> meta:
>
> * What do you want to accomplish? and for each item:
> ** Could this be accomplished today by an informal group of Wikimedians?
> ** If no, why not?
> ** How would a chapter solve this issue?
> ** What other means is there to solve this issue?
Again, http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_California has
the general answers (for projects which have already been suggested)
to the first of these questions. If the answers to why an informal
group could not accomplish the tasks listed or how a chapter could are
not clear, please let me know.
As for other means of addressing those issues, so far I have not seen
anyone except Phoebe and Jon obtain any sucess through an informal
process. For example when I was asked to obtain quotes for LCDs and a
projector for Maker Faire, I did so, and asked the San Francisco list
about who would be obtaining the specified equipment, I was told in no
uncertain terms that I should not be asking the Foundation. In fact,
I've been rebuffed on more than one occasion for asking for what I
thought would be fairly simple things. I understand the reasons now,
but they were not clear at the time.
This has convinced me that we should be following the established
Foundation chapter grants process instead of simply using informal
email or IRC to ask Foundation staff to obtain the requirements for
the projects which have been proposed. Is there any evidence to the
contrary?
Regards,
James