Talk:Wiki Education Foundation: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Widthdrawal of application: Yes, that was the disagreement |
Pjthepiano (talk | contribs) →Widthdrawal of application: reply to jbmurray |
||
Line 172:
But to cut to the chase... My understanding is that the sticking point was that Affcom wanted this to be a membership organization, and what became the Board of the WEF didn't want to have any members beyond the Board itself. So they withdrew their application. --[[User:Jbmurray|Jbmurray]] ([[User talk:Jbmurray|talk]]) 07:02, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
:Yes, that was the disagreement. It became clear that sorting out a version of membership that was acceptable to both AffCom and the current board might be possible, but would not be quick, so we suspended the application in order to focus on getting the organization actually starting (e.g. hiring a PM). [[User:Mike Christie|Mike Christie]] ([[User talk:Mike Christie|talk]]) 23:16, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
:@Jbmurray - I think you are implying that we are seeking to deny the WP community a voice in the WEF when that is simply not the case. We were advised by our attorney that there are many legal requirements associated with the "members" of the organization. One basic issue, for example is that we must an accurate accounting of who is a legal member of the organization. As the present discussion on the ENB demonstrates, many WP-ians who are part of the program would like to remain anonymous. So how do we comply with Delaware law regarding members if we can't even say who our members are? What we are proposing instead is that each constituency - including WP-ians - be given the right to select the people that represent them on the Board. The Board will legally be the only "members" of the organization, but the community will be able to select its Board members. I think this addresses both the legal and policy issues we're facing. [[User:Pjthepiano|Pjthepiano]] ([[User talk:Pjthepiano|talk]]) 23:20, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
| |||