On 7 October 2011 21:17, Alice Wiegand
<me.lyzzy@googlemail.com> wrote:
Hi Samuel,
to begin with: I am really glad to see that this list isn't forgotten. I'm spending this weekend with a friend and lots of art, so please forgive me for choosing a few clear words instead of an extended diplomatic talk.
Within the last weeks, started after Wikimania, there were some smaller and some not so small and more significant changes in the movement roles articles. I registered them and tried to get some idea, where the origins of these developments laid. But there weren't any explanations on this list and not even on the discussion pages. And questions and comments (not that much, but there were some) on the discussion pages were ignored at the same time.
And that was the time you've lost me. Sure, there was always the opportunity to come up here or on the discussion pages and ask, but to be honest, there were other discussions, for example the chapters council idea, which were much more asking for input and cooperation and therefor get more attention.
I know that I wasn't very active the weeks before - but who was? I absolutely understand that you are trying to keep this thing alive and push it forward. But today it looks more like a board-thing than it ever has looked like. It is ok to have the board in charge to get a result, to lead the process and to set milestones and deadlines. But now it seems that charter and additional documents were written by a board member, to be discussed at the upcoming board meeting, to then be introduced to "the movement" by the board.
I just don't believe that you will get the necessary support from all concerned parties with this approach. I am with Lodewijk and his concerns here.
To come to an end of this nagging mail: I still think that it is possible to work on the movement roles thing cooperatively. But it needs more than only board intention, it needs to bind parallel initiatives like the concrete chapters council ideas and it needs to be more communicative. Rearrange the movement roles core group, redefine the core tasks of the group and ask for new participants. Let us try to not just bury this group without a single word of sorrow, but let us bury it honestly with a deep and public regret if it doesn't make sense to reanimate it.
Best, Alice.
Am 07.10.2011 um 20:25 schrieb Samuel Klein:
> Some Chapters have been reviewing the recommendation for a Chapters Council, but the language is still going through review, and this too will need another round of focus.
Can you elaborate this? What were the reactions, which chapters were involved?