[intl-discuss] Local Chapter Guidelines

[Dave McIlhagga]

Just did a quick review as well - I tend to agree with everything Frank 
has proposed below. I would stress that because we should want to 
encourage as many local chapters as possible to form, there should be as 
few barriers to making this happen as possible.

For instance - why do we need a minimum number of 10 people to form a 
chapter? if 3 people want to get together in a local area to talk about 
OSGeo - shouldn't we encourage that?

And forcing an OSGeo chapter to include an OSGeo member would instantly 
make it impossible to form a chapter in over 200 countries around the 
world ...

Dave



Frank Warmerdam wrote:
> Arnulf,
> 
> I reviewed the Local Chapter Guidelines wiki page at:
> 
>   http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php/Local_Chapter_Guidelines
> 
> Generally I like it, but I have a few concerns / suggestions.
> 
> 1) I don't specially see that a local chapter needs to have a voting
>    member of OSGeo involved.  We don't require this of projects, or
>    committees, so why local chapters?
> 
> 2) I think we need to imagine 2-3 "levels" of chapter.   The minimum
>    level might not have any "official" existance, just existing as a 
> mailing
>    list and wiki pages.  This is roughly the same as the "working group"
>    discussed in the past.
> 
>    The second level would be authorized by the board, has a "project" on 
> the
>    osgeo domain, mailing lists and is expected to designate someone to 
> report
>    back to the board (but not necessarily an officer).   The group does a
>    variety of things, but maintains no chapter private chapter finances.
> 
>    The third level might actually officially exist as an organization in 
> the
>    country where it is formed, has it's own chapter board, has it's own
>    bank account, etc.   This level would potentially be required if the 
> local
>    chapter wants to put on local conferences or pursue other kinds of 
> projects
>    that might require funding, sponsorship, etc.  I would not necessarily
>    expect detailed OSGeo oversight of such finances.
> 
>    I imagine something like OSGeo Japan Branch being in category 3, while
>    some other chapters not wanting too much organizational overhead might
>    opt for category 2.  Groups working on building some momentum to form
>    a chapter might start in category 1, and might never get past that level
>    if there is no need.
> 
> 3) I foresee some local chapters that are essentially very local "social
>    and support" groups.  For instance, the mooted "OSGeo Ottawa Chapter".
>    Such chapters would be focused around a local group that meets regularly
>    as opposed to a "language or national" based group that might not 
> actually
>    meet in person frequently.
> 
> 4) Generally I think OSGeo needs to ensure that local chapters are
>    behaving in a manner congruent with the OSGeo mission, and not
>    otherwise bringing the foundation into disrepute, but beyond that
>    we shouldn't need to interfere much.
> 
> I do like the idea of language based chapters acting as an advocate for
> translation into their language.
> 
> Best regards,