Re: [Wikimania-l] [Foundation-l] Floating a notion: permanent Wikimania committee? - Wikimania-l

James Forrester

18 Jun 18 Jun

7:28 a.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Floating a notion: permanent Wikimania committee?

On 18 June 2010 08:00, phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Michael Snow <wikipedia(a)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(a)wikimedia.org | jdforrester(a)gmail.com [[Wikipedia:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]

Reply

Moushira Elamrawy

9:10 a.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Floating a notion: permanent Wikimania committee?

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(a)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(a)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(a)jdforrester.org>wrote;wrote:

On 18 June 2010 08:00, phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Michael Snow <wikipedia(a)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(a)wikimedia.org | jdforrester(a)gmail.com [[Wikipedia:User:Jdforrester|James F.]] _______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

_______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

Reply

Moushira Elamrawy

11:47 a.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Floating a notion: permanent Wikimania committee?

Hi Harel, 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.

Exactly. Organizing Wikimania needs action. Will the committee act? ...

...

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. That's what I meant when I brought up the name of Délphine and her role.

An experienced and executive person is required. I am not sure if you personally know her. I was among the team of Wikimania2008, and definitly someone of that role was required. Enthusiasm and some knowledge are wonderful, but they don't get things done. The amount of details related to organizing such a conference need experience and knowledge. Devil is in the details, so it takes another devil to watch out for them. I am unfortunately not going to make it to Poland in 2010, but I would be more than happy to contribute in discussion/meetings from distant. Good luck in 2011 Harel M

...

On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Moushira Elamrawy <moushirah(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

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(a)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(a)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(a)jdforrester.org>wrote;wrote:

On 18 June 2010 08:00, phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Michael Snow <wikipedia(a)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(a)wikimedia.org | jdforrester(a)gmail.com [[Wikipedia:User:Jdforrester|James F.]] _______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

_______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

-- Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur. _______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

Reply

Harel Cain

1:31 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Floating a notion: permanent Wikimania committee?

I do know Delphine personally (well, at least to some extent) and have been in touch with her on such matters. She's definitely another option for assuming the role of formal point of contact for local Wikimania teams. We just need someone (Sue?) to act and appoint someone to this role. Moushira, I would be very happy for us to learn from the experience of the Alexandria 2008 team. Unfortunately I couldn't make it there. On a personal level, if we see real cooperation between the Egyptian and Israeli teams - that would be a true achievement. We'll be very happy for as many of you as possible to come to Haifa. Harel On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Moushira Elamrawy <moushirah(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote: