Hi all,
This discussion is happening at the right time for us over here with the Haifa local team. As Samuel said above (he got to meet us last week), we're still in that honeymoon phase with lots of motivation, maybe even exaggerated motivation, that's looking to be put to good use.
I have written to this list before, and to individual Wikimania-related experts both in the Foundation staff and outside it, for the four of us who're coming to Gdansk to use the opportunity to meet with them and learn from their experience. I'm sure that would be very helpful, even if no committee is ever set up.
Again, I'm not sure that the formality of a committee is a necessity, if that committee doesn't have a very clear role and is not put to optimal use. I'm more confident, thought, that we're missing one or more "formal" "one-stop-shop" points of contact, people who can answer us in an on-going and interactive manner not only based on their accumulated experience, but rather with full authority about their answers. I'm thinking mainly about questions related to funding and sponsorship, but not only.
Currently, and please everyone correct me if I'm wrong, there's not even a single person on the WMF staff that can be considered such a point of contact. Names that come to mind include Cary, James Owen and Samuel Klein, but this is not the job definition of any of them.
If one or two people who have the proper background and the willingness to do it can somehow be assigned (by the board? by Sue?) to act as formal point of contact for the local teams, that IMHO is more effective than a big committee.
See y'all in Gdansk! (I'm still looking for partners for my panel about conflicts between chapters and local editor communities, which has 29 listed interested attendeeds, please contact me if relevant)
Harel Cain Wikimedia Israel (and the Wikimania 2011 team)
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Moushira Elamrawy moushirah@gmail.comwrote:
Yes, but just on a second though: The committee is a good idea as it will advise, and discuss, but how is this committee *actin*g? Otherwise you need a committee to oversee the committee. You need someone who knows what to do when. Acting. That needs one or two people, not necessarily a committee. I am not sure if the committee will get things done, which is what is required.
Thanks M
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Jeromy-Yu Chan (Jerry~Yuyu) < jerry.tschan.yu@gmail.com> wrote:
I do think it is a good idea
as each Wikimania we have cope with things in similar situation though committee is not necessary but we should have better knowledge management and transfer mechanism
anyway if really such committee will start I would like to be part of it
Jerry~雨雨 Jeromy-Yu Maximilian Chan, ARAD User:Yuyu | zh.wikipedia | Wikimedia HK ChapCom, WMF | ComCom, WMF Blogger | http://jeromyu.wordpress.com MSN: jeromyuchan@msn.com also Jeromyu on twitter, plurk and most of places
Tel (Mobile): +852 9279 1601 Laudamus quae laudentur Qui mollis et dissolutus est in opere suo frater est sua opera dissipantis Non clamatis hostilia, numquam esse vos accusatoribus
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 15:28, James Forrester james@jdforrester.orgwrote:
On 18 June 2010 08:00, phoebe ayers phoebe.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Michael Snow wikipedia@verizon.net
wrote:
On 6/17/2010 5:35 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
OK, so I guess my question is (and we talked about this on IRC too)
--
who has the power or the ability -- or who *should*, in a perfect world -- create such a committee? We don't have much precedent for this. There were concerns over who or what body can create governance/oversight structures, particularly if this isn't really just a Foundation issue.
I suppose the board could create the committee, if it's not clear who else might have the authority. Or perhaps better, the board could authorize its creation. I think the board is a bit reluctant to jump
in,
partly for the reason Sue mentioned that overseeing Wikimania is not really a board-level issue (it's primarily operational rather than strategic), but also because the board is not well placed to fill and maintain committees like this. When it becomes a situation of
appointing
people none of us really knows, or feeling that there are probably people we're not aware who ought to be recruited to a committee like this, it's pretty uncomfortable to have that responsibility. But if we authorized the committee and then let the staff and experienced Wikimania volunteers review applications or expressions of interest to join the committee, that might work out. That's kind of the direction things have moved in any case. Some of the early committees that still function have evolved to a place outside the board's immediate
activity,
and the current work of the governance committee is focused more on structures needed to organize the board's own functions.
--Michael Snow
Yes, authorization seems right. I wouldn't really expect that the Board actually fill such a committee or even necessarily ask for direct reports. The question that came up in IRC though was where would such a committee derive its authority from (assuming it had any particular authority). Perhaps the answer for this is "it doesn't" and simply fills a communication and reporting role that is currently lacking. Or perhaps (my ideal scenario) we come up with a way where the interested community grants it authority by building the structure, filling the seats, etc., and that is generally recognized.
I'm interested in this case specifically of course, but I also am wondering more generally what the current state of affairs is for forming any sort of operational, community-driven committee. Of course we're good at forming wikiprojects to do things that need doing, but for areas that also require overlap with things that the office works on, it seems tricky.
Re: scheduling a time at wikimania for discussing this potential glorious wikimania committee: yes, let's. I wanted to have a reprise of the Future of Wikimania discussion from last year, anyway. How about Sunday? I'll volunteer to check with the 2011 team and other interested parties and schedule a time. This overlaps with Manuel's panel, too, but I think we need a dedicated time maybe. Stay tuned!
-- phoebe
p.s. if we get both James Owen AND James Forrester involved it will be unstoppable. Powered by James^2.
Pah. To disambiguate between the two of us, I will allow people to refer to me as "God-Prince James", per Jimmy. ;-)
James. No, the other one.
James D. Forrester jdforrester@wikimedia.org | jdforrester@gmail.com [[Wikipedia:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]
Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l