At 19:49 +0000 10/12/05, Jon wrote:
To sort out some of the issues:
*Let's stop overworrying about the name. We ended up with "Wiki
Educational Resources" by hook or crook at the meeting (and I admit
I can't recall why "Wiki UK" didn't enjoy more discussion - sorry
Arkady). However, I suggest, so that we don't debate this ad
infinitum that we accept that, absent anyone very quickly coming up
with a name other than "Wiki Educational Resources" that is
unbelievably fantastic, we stick with that. It's not that I can't
live with something else, I can, including Wiki UK, it's just
that we need a swift conclusion on this. Note that names can be
changed by 75% support in general meeting.
I agree to that name (W E R).
*The reason for having a different working or operating name than
"Wikimedia UK" is because the Wikimedia Foundation would, if
problems arose, want to be sure it could stop us using that name.
Whilst we could e nter into a contract with the Wikimedia Foundation
to change our name so that it did not use the term "Wikimedia" if
instructed to do so by the Foundation, we could not be sure of
fulfilling our side of the contract as we cannot guarantee getting
75% support for it. That's why being officially called "Wikimedia
UK" is not a good idea. (In the business world, sometimes there are
such contracts, but those entering into them control the company.)
*There isn't generally a problem having UK as a suffix for either a
company or as a working or operational name. The term "UK" is
however listed as one of those you need permission to use as a
company or operational name. In short - we need permission to use
"UK", but we would get that permission.
"UK" less contentious than other "reserved words"
*On a technical point, "Wikimedia UK" wouldn't be a trading name as
we wouldn't be trading. It would be a "working name" (as in Gordon's
example with the Third Age Trust) or we'd style it as an operating
name. Banks are used to such things, so I can't see a real problem
there.
*There's a good point (sorry, I can't see who it was who made it,
but thanks to whoever it was) about having something in the Articles
of Association allowing for meetings of directors by teleconference
or IRC. Whilst it would always be best for a face-to-face meeting
and I wouldn't want teleconferencing or IRC to become the norm, it's
best to provide for it.
*Where's James gone? We need to put the final tweaks to the MoA and
AoA and get them to a charity lawyer for perusal. Then we can
incorporate:) (as long as we're still not busy arguing over the
name;) )
Jon
What's in name?
:-)
--
Gordo (aka LoopZilla)
gordon.joly(a)pobox.com
http://pobox.com/~gordo/
http://www.loopzilla.org/