Just a few thoughts in reply. Yep, I'm a member of several organisations including a political party, as of course will be some of our Trustees, and true, not all of them verify applications but rely on the caveat of kicking people out if caught doing something 'naughty'. I don't think the rationale should be that we do things the same way, it certainly doesn't hurt to discuss alternatives. I can assure you we're fairly 'real world' about this.
The concern arose from the fact that under the current system, fraudulent membership is possible - there are no effective safeguards. Perhaps the Trustees will decide this is an acceptable risk. Verifying new membership applications are valid isn't our primary concern - the 20 page membership report submitted to the board that is entirely dedicated to better understanding what our members want, delivering that, and therefore expanding our membership through strategic recruitment underlines the priorities. Do have a read<http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_UK_Membership_Development_report.pdf>, and feel free to add any thoughts on my talk page. Approaching other organisations - naturally that's something I'm already doing. I've asked the mailing list as well because many of it subscribers are concerned and interested parties when it comes to how the Chapter is run and I value their feedback on matters like this - good and bad. I'll certainly factor in the comments of respondents who aren't pro any checking such as yours in my feedback to Trustees. Kat On 22 November 2012 12:58, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 22 November 2012 12:44, michael west <michaw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Just to put this into a real world perspective. I an a member of the > > Labour Party which gives me certain rights to vote. I've never once in > > 23 years been asked to provide evidence of who I am. In terms of > > entryism the Labour Party has had a long history and the problem is > > dealt with not with postcards or expensive credit checks or heaven > > forbid notorised copies of documents but with a simple acceptence that > > you abide by the constitution. If you don't you get kicked out and if > > you disagree you take the party to court at your own expense. For a > > post that has had so many contributions I haven't seen much > > justification for any change in what you do already. The fear of reds > > under the bed or freak cabals seems to more important that actually > > signing up members and supporters and bogging them down with what if > > requirements. Maybe an approach to another charity or the electoral > > reform society and ask how they deal with ghost members might be more > > enlightening, than throwing it open to a public mailing list. > > > +1 > > The real solution is more members. > > > - d. > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > -- *Katherine Bavage * *Fundraising Manager * *Wikimedia UK* +44 20 7065 0949 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
