View source for Local Chapters Working Group/Meeting 2011-04-19

== Attendance ==

{| class=wikitable
! IRC           !! Name                 !! Present !! Apologies 
|-
| karida      || Daniel Kastl        ||    y    ||             
|-
| seav        || Eugene Alvin Villar      ||    y   ||             
|-
| toffehoff     || Henk Hoff            ||    y     ||             
|}

== Minutes (Draft) ==


* ....

== IRC Log ==

<pre>
[17:12] toffehoff: Looking at the time.... 
[17:12] karida: It seems others are caught by deadlines as well
[17:13] toffehoff: Think they do as well (deadlines...)
[17:13] toffehoff: Question....
[17:14] karida: Well, we can postpone for a week
[17:14] toffehoff: I was going through some draft agreements etc.
[17:14] toffehoff: also looking at the ones of the WMF
[17:15] toffehoff: As a draft, could we just take the WMF ones and tweak them a bit ... ?
[17:15] karida: Well, I haven't looked at it yet.
[17:16] karida: I think it would be nice to have everything ready before SotM ... it would be a nice milestone as probably many of us would be there, right?
[17:16] toffehoff: Would be great.... yes.
[17:16] toffehoff: btw, which SotM do you mean ?
[17:16] toffehoff: EU of Denver?
[17:17] karida: The one in Denver.
[17:17] karida: I can't go to the one in EU
[17:17] toffehoff: Denver is a good choice 
[17:18] toffehoff: I'll be at both ... But that could be expected 
[17:18] karida: I'm usually at FOSS4G, so this year it suits well
[17:18] toffehoff: Awesome. That was also one of the reasons to go for Denver and move it to September.
[17:18] karida: Last years was unlucky, because I couldn't afford to travel to Spain twice
[17:19] toffehoff: Can imagine.
[17:19] karida: Well, we should then maybe organise some local chapter talk/meeting
[17:20] toffehoff: Back to agreement etc. .... Shall I start a document based on the WMF one and change it to what we've discussed before?
[17:20] karida: Yes, that would be nice. I can't help much with legal talk
[17:21] toffehoff: I'm not a legal person as well, but have been in contact with some guys in the past 
[17:22] toffehoff: If we have something like that we can through it to the mailinglist and (hopefully) get some responses.
[17:22] toffehoff: through = throw
[17:24] karida: Do you have any idea how a roadmap could look like if we for example want to have everything done until Denver?
[17:24] karida: Probably the decision making process within OSMF might take quite some time as well
[17:25] toffehoff: Right.....  Thinking about it ....
[17:26] toffehoff: I'm not sure how we should get this thing accepted?
[17:26] karida: I have absolutely now no idea how bureaucratic OSMF is already 
[17:26] toffehoff: Does this needs to be voted on in the AGM...
[17:27] toffehoff: I'll discuss this within board how to get this done ...
[17:27] karida: Probably it's necessary to try to define some roadmap to get to some result in the near future.
[17:27] toffehoff: Absolutely.
[17:28] karida: From the local chapters there is not much to decide, I think, so it's pretty easy.
[17:28] toffehoff: Can we now roughly decide what kind of deliverables we have.
[17:28] toffehoff: - Agreement
[17:28] toffehoff: - Procedure how to become an LC
[17:29] toffehoff: Anything else?
[17:29] karida: I don't think it needs more
[17:29] karida: Something to sign and some rules
[17:30] toffehoff: Should we try and do both at the same time?
[17:30] karida: Probably the agreement can be derived from the procedure and requirements to become a LC
[17:30] seav betrad het kanaal.
[17:31] seav: sorry i'm late
[17:31] toffehoff: Hello!
[17:31] karida: hi
[17:31] toffehoff: Just discussing a roadmap ... which steps to take  ....
[17:31] seav: ok, i'm reviewing the log
[17:31] karida:        http://openstreetmap.jp/irclog/%23osm_chapters/2011-04-20.html    
[17:32] seav: karida, very useful btw
[17:32] karida: we had a discussion about privacy and IRC logs in the Japanese community
[17:32] karida: no everyone likes the logs
[17:33] seav: i see
[17:33] karida: so we decided to exclude them from search through robots.txt
[17:34] seav: well, we aren't really talking about confidential stuff, right?
[17:34] karida: right ... you better don't do this on IRC anyway 
[17:35] seav: anyway, regarding talking stuff from WMF, wasn't this done before?
[17:35] toffehoff: We talked about it before.
[17:35] toffehoff: Was looking at the text and thought about copying it. Felt a bit like stealing....
[17:36] seav: i remember seeing a sorta "how to become a local chapter" document somewhere that I recognized came from wikimedia
[17:36] seav: back in 2009
[17:36] toffehoff: Could be.
[17:36] toffehoff: I now was refering to the agreement.
[17:36] seav: the main problem was that it wouldn't fit the german situation
[17:36] toffehoff: We can tweak it...
[17:37] toffehoff: and the same with membership.....
[17:37] seav: ok
[17:38] toffehoff: We're all good with taking the WMF agreement as boilerplate for ours?
[17:38] toffehoff: .... and change them to our needs  ....
[17:39] karida: I think if it works for Wikimedia it can't be a bad document to start with
[17:39] seav: i'm ok with it
[17:39] seav: i'm biased of course 
[17:39] toffehoff: At least you're not upset with us taking the WMF as boilerplate ... 
[17:40] seav: maybe the WMF would be
[17:40] seav: but i'm not WMF
[17:40] seav:                          
[17:41] toffehoff: Let me work on the draft agreement.
[17:41] toffehoff: Is anyone of you both interested in setting up the draft procedure how to become a chapter?
[17:42] karida: What about stealing?  http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Step-by-step_chapter_creation_guide
[17:42] toffehoff: ... or go over the one that's already drawn up on the wiki....
[17:42] seav: is it a procedure really? or a list of requirements?
[17:43] karida: I think the requirements are enough at first
[17:43] seav: one minor problem is that the WMF procedures assume that the local chapter has not been founded yet
[17:43] karida: Then later someone can make a more beautiful guide as the WMF
[17:43] seav: with OSM, there are already existing orgs: Estonia, Spain, USA, Japan, Philippines
[17:44] toffehoff: Requirements and also where to apply ...
[17:44] toffehoff: that kind of stuff...
[17:44] karida: Well, for those already exisitng, this would be a special case anyway and doesn't need a guide anymore
[17:44] seav: it's possible that something about an existing org is unacceptable to OSMF
[17:45] karida: OSMF Japan actually thought the currently listed requirements are already defined, so we setup the local chapter with those requirements in mind
[17:46] seav: i see
[17:46] toffehoff: Before we go into that .....
[17:46] karida: Already existing LC can tell, if the requirements wouldn't work for them
[17:46] toffehoff: Let's first see what the requirements are.
[17:47] toffehoff: and then see if we may have a problem.
[17:47] seav: 1) non-profit
[17:47] seav: 2) membership-based org
[17:47] seav: 3) aims/objectives/mission-vision aligned with OSMF
[17:47] karida: Isn't it described as "Rules for Local Chapters"
[17:48] seav: also, do we allow overlapping chapters?
[17:48] seav: e.g., OSM Espana and OSM Catalonia?
[17:48] toffehoff: First reaction: I would say no.
[17:49] karida: We could say it must be a country
[17:49] seav: how about sub-countries (especially in federated states)?
[17:49] seav: like OSM Queensland
[17:49] toffehoff: e.g. the usa.
[17:49] seav: or OSM Quebec
[17:49] karida: You could then say they need to be local chapters of the local chapters 
[17:50] seav: ah, so an OSM Quebec could not be recognized until the Canadians get their act together?
[17:50] toffehoff: My feeling is not the restrict it to countries.
[17:50] toffehoff: Leave that open.
[17:50] karida: Well, I don't know if OSMF wants to deal with every tiny local chapter
[17:50] seav: but no overlaps?
[17:51] toffehoff: Overlaps would be a potential hell.
[17:51] karida: if you tke countries, then there shouldn't be legal overlaps
[17:51] seav: overlaps is a recognized problem in WMF
[17:51] toffehoff: But some countries are rather large....
[17:51] karida: in population? or map features?
[17:52] toffehoff: I had a discussion with someone of the USA
[17:52] karida: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Local_chapter_FAQ tells LC are countries
[17:53] seav: that's not quite exact
[17:53] seav: there is a Wikimedia New York City
[17:53] seav: that's the only local WMF chapter that isn't a country
[17:53] toffehoff: If a region is big enough of somehow outstanding of the rest....
[17:54] toffehoff: Again, I would not restrict it. It would be logical, and probably the most common thing to do.
[17:54] karida: I would restrict it to countries and then wait for others to come with really good arguments
[17:55] seav: karida, that's workable
[17:55] toffehoff: We can put it up for debate...
[17:56] toffehoff: seav: is overlapping seen as a problem in WMF?
[17:56] seav: yes, overlapping is a problem
[17:56] seav: 1) people may get confused who officially represents wikimedia in a territory
[17:57] toffehoff: That was also what I was thinking when I mentioned not to be in favor of overlap.....
[17:57] karida: One interesting question would be: what if someone wants to start another LC of the same country? Just because one LC isn't open enough or whatever reason. Is the first LC always the winner?
[17:57] seav: for WMF, yes
[17:58] seav: first-come first-served
[17:58] seav: if the LC is open enough for OSMF, then it's open enough
[17:58] seav: no need for another LC
[17:58] toffehoff: That can of course change during time....
[17:59] toffehoff: Would a yearly renewal (automaticly) of the agreement be an option?
[17:59] karida: Can a LC lose it's status as official LC? Will there be a yearly review for example?
[17:59] toffehoff: If it doesn't meet the requirements anymore.
[18:00] toffehoff: There should be a clause in the agreement how to end the agreement.
[18:01] seav: i think automatic renewal is the norm
[18:01] seav: with exit clauses
[18:01] toffehoff: Something like that.
[18:02] toffehoff: So if there would be someone else wanting to start an LC in the same country there would be a way to handle it.
[18:02] seav: seque: one problem: local-chapters is very quiet
[18:03] seav: nobody really reacted to my email
[18:03] seav: s/seque/segue/
[18:03] toffehoff: I noticed that too.
[18:04] toffehoff: Maybe someone will react when we have some draft agreement
[18:05] seav: hopefully
[18:05] seav: so going back to the requirements...
[18:05] toffehoff: That looks more final....
[18:05] seav: non-profit, membership-based, aligned with OSMF?
[18:05] seav: agree?
[18:05] seav: other additions?
[18:06] karida: In the "Rules" on the wiki page there is also
[18:06] karida: - have at least 20 members as "should have"
[18:06] karida: Do you want to have "should have" requirements?
[18:07] seav: nice to have, maybe
[18:07] toffehoff: that actually is intended as "have a reasonable amount of members".
[18:07] seav:        http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Guidelines_for_future_chapters    
[18:08] seav:        http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requirements_for_future_chapters    
[18:08] karida: And: "Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License;" ... so we can "steal" 
[18:08] seav: "The chapter must involve contributors to the Wikimedia projects." ---- > "The chapter must involve contributors to OpenStreetMap"?
[18:09] karida: Both are actually requirements for OSMF Japan for example
[18:09] karida: for their members
[18:09] seav: "The chapter must have a legal structure/corporation that is legally independent from the Wikimedia Foundation." ---> we discussed this the last meeting, right? 
[18:09] toffehoff: seav: yes
[18:10] seav: karida, i disagree about requiring LC members to also be OSM contributors
[18:10] seav: there *should* be contributors in the LC
[18:10] seav: but not all members should be contributors
[18:11] karida: Well, it also depends on how you define "contributor"
[18:11] toffehoff: It should represent the community.
[18:11] seav: contributor = has an OSM account
[18:11] seav: (whether or not that account has edits)
[18:11] seav: i am thinking of LC members that can just be plain downstream OSM data users
[18:11] karida: That's a good definition and actually very easy to achieve
[18:12] seav: they don't have an account but they have a stake in OSM
[18:12] toffehoff: Do members have to be individuals or can also organisations become member of an LC?
[18:13] seav: i'm not sure about orgs being members
[18:13] karida: In Japan there is also corporate membership possible
[18:13] karida: And FOSSGIS allows this as well
[18:13] seav: i guess the LC can decide for itself
[18:13] seav: "The chapter is geographically based/anchored in a legal jurisdiction." --> we can adopt this too
[18:13] toffehoff: OK, but does the corporation also need to have an OSM account?
[18:14] seav: "The mission of the organisation must be in line with the mission of the Wikimedia Foundation." --> "The mission of the organisation must be in line with the mission of the OpenStreetMap Foundation."
[18:14] seav: as i said, i don't agree with requiring having an OSM account to be an LC member
[18:15] karida: Well, I think it should be up to the LC anyway to decide that.
[18:15] seav: hmmm, does OSMF require its members to have OSM accounts?
[18:16] toffehoff: To my knowledge: no.
[18:17] seav: ok
[18:17] seav: then i guess the we leave it up to the LC as well
[18:17] seav: so the requirement is that the LC should represent the local community or at least involve OSM contributors
[18:18] seav: right?
[18:18] toffehoff: The first.
[18:18] karida: Does a local chapter represent the local community?
[18:19] toffehoff: it should....
[18:19] karida: I thought it supports the local community for example
[18:19] seav: well here's a question:
[18:20] seav: if OSMF wanted to ask what the Japanese OSM community thinks of something, does it ask the Japan LC or does it ask the OSM contributors in Japan?
[18:20] karida: It asks talk-ja
[18:20] seav: in wikimedia, there's a strong distinction between the community and the LC
[18:20] karida: The community is not the foundation IMO
[18:21] seav: the Japanese Wikipedia editors != Wikimedia Japan
[18:21] toffehoff: OK: the local chapter respresents the OSM project.
[18:21] toffehoff: ?
[18:22] seav: so the LC speaks for OSMF in the LC's territory?
[18:22] seav: for wikimedia, WMF only represents itself worldwide
[18:22] karida: They maybe represent the OSMF ... but the LC can be a legal entitiy for the community
[18:23] toffehoff: being a legal entity for the community ... isn't that the same a representing the community?
[18:24] toffehoff: If a newsagency in Japan would like to write about OSM. Who do they go to?
[18:25] karida: Isnt' the first sentence on the LC wiki page good: "Local Chapters are proposed not-for-profit legal entities to be established within different territories around the world which can act as official local representatives of the Foundation when dealing with local government, business and media."
[18:25] seav: I think the LC
[18:25] seav: key phrase: "can act"
[18:26] seav: it's not the same as "is"
[18:26] karida: seav: exactly
[18:26] toffehoff: meaning?
[18:27] karida: there is no exclusive right of the LC to be the representative
[18:27] karida: or legal entity
[18:28] seav: the newsagency could also go to OSMF directly
[18:28] seav: and the OSMF can redirect to the LC if it so chooses
[18:28] karida: or ask a mapper community
[18:29] seav: i guess the point is that the LC supports the community
[18:29] karida: So LC are more "helper organisations"
[18:29] seav: and not the community supporting the LC
[18:29] toffehoff: ok
[18:30] • toffehoff looking at the time.
[18:30] karida: What says the board?
[18:30] toffehoff: About what?
[18:31] karida: Maybe good to hrear their opinions as well
[18:31] karida: About requirements
[18:31] toffehoff: Sure, but they've asked us to come up with a proposal.
[18:31] seav: ah i see
[18:31] karida: Or you prefer to make some draft and then let them submit +1 messages
[18:31] seav: I guess I can cobble a wiki page stealing points from WMF
[18:32] seav:                          
[18:32] toffehoff: Something like that.
[18:32] seav: and just mark those requirements that are up for debate
[18:32] toffehoff: Was also going to do something like that for the agreement.
[18:32] toffehoff: Why not have everything up for debate?
[18:33] toffehoff: Like: this is what we came up with ....
[18:33] seav: ok
[18:35] toffehoff: seav: can you make such a wiki-page for the requirements?
[18:35] seav: ok i will
[18:36] seav: it's holy week and we have no work on thursday and friday... i can do it then
[18:36] toffehoff: Thanks.
[18:37] toffehoff: Somewhere as a subpage of http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Local_chapter
[18:38] seav: ok
[18:38] seav: wrap-up?
[18:38] toffehoff: lets' do.
[18:38] toffehoff: seav: you're going to set up the requirements page.
[18:38] toffehoff: I'm going to do the same for the agreement.
[18:39] seav: ok
[18:39] toffehoff: Next week or in two weeks?
[18:39] seav: by next week
[18:39] toffehoff: ok
[18:39] karida: So I will then take a look and give comments
[18:39] karida: Thanks!
[18:39] toffehoff: Next meeting also next week then?
[18:40] karida: Well, if there is something to discuss then ... just send some reminder on the list.
[18:41] toffehoff: OK. will do.
[18:41] toffehoff: Thanks you both!@
[18:42] seav: great!
</pre>