Task: We need a policy surrounding country-based chapter.

[Mariatta]

Preferably Pyladies chapter are created locally/city-based, e.g. PyLadies Vancouver, instead of Pyladies BC, or PyLadies Canada.

Currently there are a few "country"-based chapters.

[lorenanicole]

Per https://github.com/pyladies/project-admin-logisitics/issues/9#issuecomment-565585553, I think we ought to do something like this for country based chapters ...

Country Wide Requests Workflow

• On intake confirm what the requestor wants to scope the chapter to asking why a country if they desire one
• During the monthly / whatever time schedule @pyladies/admin-and-logistics group reviews requests discuss the review including: the rationale provided from the requestor, researching to confirm if there's any merit in the rationale, confirming a country designation doesn't already exist
• The @pyladies/admin-and-logistics team either 👍 or 👎 to proposal
• If 👍 , then the country designation is made and future requests for pyladies chapters for cities within that country require communication between the chapter and city chapters
• If 👎 , then the @pyladies/admin-and-logistics responds why it cannot approve a country and asks the city designation they want instead

Examples where country designation is valid

regional oversight Consider PyLadies Brasil, they act as a parent organization for a large number of regional chapters!

small country Consider PyLadies Uruguay, in conversation with the organizer who is based in Montevideo they confirmed that the tech industry is large and part based in Montevideo and most tech groups label themselves as country specific rather than city specific. Additionally as Uruguay is a smaller country, this is the largest metropolitan area.

Questions

• If we do allow country specific, what are the ramifications of that? Such as, does that country chapter "own" all future coming city chapters?
• If we do not allow country specific, is this making PyLadies less globally inclusive?