Talk:Local Chapter Guidelines

From OSGeo
Revision as of 06:53, 5 June 2006 by Arnulf Christl (talk | contribs) (added discussion from email by frankw)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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.