Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
25 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

valdelli@bluemail.ch
I am looking the new chapters and I have seen that there is the
project of creation of Wikimedia Hong Kong.

I don't understand if this creation is correct considering that
Hong Kong will be completely integrated in mainland of China in the
2047.

Ilario
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

Andrew Gray
On 24/10/06, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I am looking the new chapters and I have seen that there is the
> project of creation of Wikimedia Hong Kong.
>
> I don't understand if this creation is correct considering that
> Hong Kong will be completely integrated in mainland of China in the
> 2047.

2047 is a long, long time away. When it comes, we can cross that bridge.

--
- Andrew Gray
  [hidden email]
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

valdelli@bluemail.ch
In reply to this post by valdelli@bluemail.ch
Ok... and in this case can also South Tyrol create its own chapter
considering that he has the some autonomy that Hong Kong and it not
will finish in 2047?

...and also Guernesey, Man, Shark....

Ilario

----Messaggio originale----
Da: [hidden email]
Data: 24.10.06 18.19
A: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"<[hidden email]>
Oggetto: Re: [Foundation-l] Some question about Wikimedia Hong
Kong

>
> I don't understand if this creation is correct considering that
> Hong Kong will be completely integrated in mainland of China in
the
> 2047.

2047 is a long, long time away. When it comes, we can cross that
bridge.

--
- Andrew Gray
  [hidden email]




_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

Effe iets anders
If you live there, and find enough people who want that as well, you
can think about it. I can imagine very well that in very big countries
such as china, russia, US etc a number of chapters could be set up
anyway. It is not reaonable to have general assemblees for your hobby
where you have to fly for several hours to attend. so, when there are
enought people, they can make a proposal for the chapters committee I
guess :)

Lodewijk

2006/10/24, [hidden email] <[hidden email]>:

> Ok... and in this case can also South Tyrol create its own chapter
> considering that he has the some autonomy that Hong Kong and it not
> will finish in 2047?
>
> ...and also Guernesey, Man, Shark....
>
> Ilario
>
> ----Messaggio originale----
> Da: [hidden email]
> Data: 24.10.06 18.19
> A: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"<[hidden email]>
> Oggetto: Re: [Foundation-l] Some question about Wikimedia Hong
> Kong
>
> >
> > I don't understand if this creation is correct considering that
> > Hong Kong will be completely integrated in mainland of China in
> the
> > 2047.
>
> 2047 is a long, long time away. When it comes, we can cross that
> bridge.
>
> --
> - Andrew Gray
>   [hidden email]
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

geni
In reply to this post by valdelli@bluemail.ch
On 10/24/06, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Ok... and in this case can also South Tyrol create its own chapter
> considering that he has the some autonomy that Hong Kong and it not
> will finish in 2047?
>
> ...and also Guernesey, Man, Shark....


Gibraltar would be a more interesting case

In any event Hong Kong declares independence after the Chinese civil
war of 2020 (noted as being the first civil war in which nukes play a
part).


Trying to set up a firm policy of one chapter per country is a really
bad idea since it gives us the problem of trying to define what a
country is.
--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

Delphine Ménard
On 10/24/06, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Trying to set up a firm policy of one chapter per country is a really
> bad idea since it gives us the problem of trying to define what a
> country is.


Hence the reason why we are not trying.

One chapter per "jurisdiction" is closer to what we are trying to do.

Delphine
--
~notafish
NB. This address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent to
this address will probably get lost.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

geni
On 10/24/06, Delphine Ménard <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 10/24/06, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Trying to set up a firm policy of one chapter per country is a really
> > bad idea since it gives us the problem of trying to define what a
> > country is.
>
>
> Hence the reason why we are not trying.
>
> One chapter per "jurisdiction" is closer to what we are trying to do.
>
> Delphine


Even that doesn't work (see transnistria) and then there is the issue
that Kaliningrad and Vladivostok are under the same jurisdiction.

--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

Sam Korn
On 10/24/06, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 10/24/06, Delphine Ménard <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > One chapter per "jurisdiction" is closer to what we are trying to do.
> >
> > Delphine
>
>
> Even that doesn't work (see transnistria) and then there is the issue
> that Kaliningrad and Vladivostok are under the same jurisdiction.

Delphine was quite clearly not saying this was a hard-and-fast rule.
Obviously these things should be taken case-by-case.

There's no need to pick holes in everything anyone says.  It's very impolite.

--
Sam
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

valdelli@bluemail.ch
In reply to this post by valdelli@bluemail.ch
Why?

If the chapter must have a legal basis and legal ability it must be
founded on "jurisdictional" basis.

The rule is based on jurisdiction and not in the countries border.

Ilario

----Messaggio originale----
Da: [hidden email]
Data: 24.10.06 19.01
A: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"<[hidden email]>
Oggetto: Re: [Foundation-l] Some question about Wikimedia Hong
Kong

On 10/24/06, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 10/24/06, Delphine Ménard <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > One chapter per "jurisdiction" is closer to what we are trying
to do.
> >
> > Delphine
>


Delphine was quite clearly not saying this was a hard-and-fast
rule.
Obviously these things should be taken case-by-case.

There's no need to pick holes in everything anyone says.  It's very
impolite.



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

Sam Korn
On 10/24/06, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Why?
>
> If the chapter must have a legal basis and legal ability it must be
> founded on "jurisdictional" basis.
>
> The rule is based on jurisdiction and not in the countries border.

Geni pointed out some problems in the one-chapter-per-juristiction
approach.  I pointed out that Delphine had not suggested such a thing
as a hard and fast rule.

Obviously chapters must have reference to juristictions for legal reasons.

--
Sam
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

Effe iets anders
There are many ways of seeing jurisdictions. I thought Russia was
formally a federal republic btw? But otherwise you could also take
provinces if you'd like. or states. I think as long as it is one law,
and it is clear where the chapter stops being a chapter.

Lodewijk

2006/10/24, Sam Korn <[hidden email]>:

> On 10/24/06, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Why?
> >
> > If the chapter must have a legal basis and legal ability it must be
> > founded on "jurisdictional" basis.
> >
> > The rule is based on jurisdiction and not in the countries border.
>
> Geni pointed out some problems in the one-chapter-per-juristiction
> approach.  I pointed out that Delphine had not suggested such a thing
> as a hard and fast rule.
>
> Obviously chapters must have reference to juristictions for legal reasons.
>
> --
> Sam
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

Łukasz Garczewski
In reply to this post by geni
geni napisał(a):

> On 10/24/06, Delphine Ménard wrote:
>> On 10/24/06, geni wrote:
>>
>>> Trying to set up a firm policy of one chapter per country is a really
>>> bad idea since it gives us the problem of trying to define what a
>>> country is.
>>
>> Hence the reason why we are not trying.
>>
>> One chapter per "jurisdiction" is closer to what we are trying to do.
>>
> Even that doesn't work (see transnistria) and then there is the issue
> that Kaliningrad and Vladivostok are under the same jurisdiction.

I would approach this from a more practical angle, i.e. do we *need* a
chapter in a given territory?

Hong Kong: Yes, it is/will eventually be China. Go ahead and try to set
up a non-profit tied to a US-based Foundation in mainland China. :) If
we can have Honk Kong instead, lets do it.

Poland: WMPL has been set up and is doing fine. We could go for a
sub-chapter in each voivodship but right now that doesn't make any sense
(and probably never will ;)).

US: Being the huuuge country that they are, the US might benefit from a
more local (e.g. state-level) structure than most smaller countries (see
Poland above).

So, to answer Illario's question about South Tyrol with a question of my
own: Is South Tyrol within the 'reach' of WMIT? If so, I would be
inclined to say no to a South Tyrol chapter. If not, however, a new
chapter (possibly a subdivision of WMIT) would be something to consider.

--
TOR
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

Andrew Gray
In reply to this post by valdelli@bluemail.ch
On 24/10/06, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Ok... and in this case can also South Tyrol create its own chapter
> considering that he has the some autonomy that Hong Kong and it not
> will finish in 2047?
>
> ...and also Guernesey, Man, Shark....

[shrug] If legal and practical reasons in the relevant jurisdictions
make it practical and desirable to set up Wikimedia Guernsey, then
yes, there's no reason we wouldn't set up that chapter. I am assuming
that, currently, Hong Kong is a sensible and viable option, even if it
will not remain so forever.

This isn't some kind of one-chapter-per-country, or
one-per-geographic-unit, it's an attempt to set up local chapters on a
sensible scale on a case-by-case basis. In some cases, this will mean
subnational entities; in other cases, it may mean regional ones.

--
- Andrew Gray
  [hidden email]
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

Damian Finol-2
In reply to this post by Effe iets anders
Greetings,

I see it more like, if a group of people feel socially, culturally,
politically or for some other reason, different from other people in
their "country" they could create a chapter.

For example:
Hong Kong and Taiwan from the PRC (maybe Macau too).
Puerto Rico from the USA
French Guiana from France
And maybe (not wanting to start a war here :P) Quebec from Canada.

Just examples of my perception.

Regards,
Damian
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

geni
In reply to this post by Sam Korn
On 10/24/06, Sam Korn <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Delphine was quite clearly not saying this was a hard-and-fast rule.
> Obviously these things should be taken case-by-case.
>
> There's no need to pick holes in everything anyone says.  It's very impolite.

I admit to being a Falsificationist.

I don't like baseing stuff around countries or jurisdictions because
that risks furthering nationalism which is the cause of some of our
more persistent edit wars.

Instead I would prefer that chapters were based around logistics of
transport, population, and comunication (languages). Not of course in
many cases this will give a result that lines up with existing
boarders either national or sub-national but I would dislike makeing
such a link explicit.

--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

Michael Bimmler
On 10/24/06, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Instead I would prefer that chapters were based around logistics of
> transport, population, and comunication (languages).
I'm somewhat opposed to the concept of basing chapters around e.g.
languages. Because this would mean, that we'd have for example just
one "german-language-chapter" covering Germany, Austria and
Switzerland. You know what was the very initial reason to set up an
independent Swiss chapter? Tax deductibility of donations. If there is
an association is Germany or in the USA, Swiss (and Austrian) people
are less likely to donate money, as they can't deduce it from taxes.
Of course, this would be the same problem with an "english-language"
chapter or a "french-language" chapter or a population-based chapter
("Alaska+Canada") or a transport-based chapter (I can't find an
example here).
Further, much legal things are easier, if the association is based
there where it operates (not only tax deductibility but also doing
marketing, renting locations, all the postal mail stuff [postage] and
so on).
So I'd propose a kind of "one judicature per chapter" (note the word
order) system. This means, one chapter cannot serve / operate in
several countries, but there is still the possibility of
"sub-chapters" in different parts of the country (think of "Wikimedia
Suisse Romandie" or "Wikimedia US Pacific Coast" or "Wikimedia North
Germany" or whatever)

Regards
Michael

>Not of course in
> many cases this will give a result that lines up with existing
> boarders either national or sub-national but I would dislike makeing
> such a link explicit.
>
> --
> geni
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

geni
On 10/24/06, Michael Bimmler <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I'm somewhat opposed to the concept of basing chapters around e.g.
> languages. Because this would mean, that we'd have for example just
> one "german-language-chapter" covering Germany, Austria and
> Switzerland.

No becuase logistics issues would kick in

The languages thing with to deal with the problem of countires like
say India where it is quite posible that people would not share a
common language

Switerland has German, French, Italian, and Romansh that I know of. I
don't know how bi/trilingual people are in Switzerland.

> So I'd propose a kind of "one judicature per chapter" (note the word
> order) system.

While logicists will most require that to the case there are logical
exceptions (any kurdish speaking chapter would probably have to be
based in northen Iraq although sadly I suspect it will be a long time
before that becomes an issue).

--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

Michael Bimmler
On 10/24/06, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 10/24/06, Michael Bimmler <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I'm somewhat opposed to the concept of basing chapters around e.g.
> > languages. Because this would mean, that we'd have for example just
> > one "german-language-chapter" covering Germany, Austria and
> > Switzerland.
>
> No becuase logistics issues would kick in
>
> The languages thing with to deal with the problem of countires like
> say India where it is quite posible that people would not share a
> common language
>
> Switerland has German, French, Italian, and Romansh that I know of. I
> don't know how bi/trilingual people are in Switzerland.
depends... You are supposed to learn a second language (usu french for
german-speakers and german/italian for french-speakers) in school but
this doesn't mean you're biligual afterwards... There is a slight
tendency to communicate rather in English.
>
> > So I'd propose a kind of "one judicature per chapter" (note the word
> > order) system.
>
> While logicists will most require that to the case there are logical
> exceptions (any kurdish speaking chapter would probably have to be
> based in northen Iraq although sadly I suspect it will be a long time
> before that becomes an issue).
Truly so.
Michael
>
> --
> geni
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

valdelli@bluemail.ch
In reply to this post by valdelli@bluemail.ch

>
> No becuase logistics issues would kick in
>
> The languages thing with to deal with the problem of countires
like
> say India where it is quite posible that people would not share
a
> common language
>

It is quite possible the opposite position: they will probably
speak in english (that is the "lingua franca" of India).

> Switerland has German, French, Italian, and Romansh that I know
of. I
> don't know how bi/trilingual people are in Switzerland.

They speak in english or in german. In Europe you can easily find
persons who speak three languages without problems.

>
> While logicists will most require that to the case there are
logical
> exceptions (any kurdish speaking chapter would probably have to
be
> based in northen Iraq although sadly I suspect it will be a long
time
> before that becomes an issue).

In any case it's important to be recognized outside your nation
with a legal value. My question was based in this mean... if the
Wikimedia Hong Kong is recognized in any country as an association
with legal value.

Ilario

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Some question about Wikimedia Hong Kong

geni
On 10/24/06, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:
> It is quite possible the opposite position: they will probably
> speak in english (that is the "lingua franca" of India).

Amoung certian groups. Less so in others.

> They speak in english or in german. In Europe you can easily find
> persons who speak three languages without problems.

I'm aparently in europe.

Other examples of langue issues would be parts of africa and china.


--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
12