James Hare wrote:
Yes, I had heard that earlier.
Anyways, in that case we would have the Board of Trustees, the Advisory
Council, and the Wiki Council. Three councils. Why should we have three? Why
couldn't we compress it down to, oh, 2?
On 11/19/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net> wrote:
James Hare wrote:
I feel that if we were to set up a secondary
council, it should be that
of
outside people with talents that would be
beneficial to the Foundation.
I think your mixing this proposal up with the idea of an advisory
council which could still be an entirely different body.
Ec
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
It's a form of Wikiocracy, each one has it's tasks and serves for a
specific purpose.
In the case of the Wiki Council, I've seen some previous drafts and it's
more of a representation of several projects in some sort of House of
Representatives, the objective of which is, that every project and
subproject has a voice with a fixed ammount of people, for example 3
from major projects, 2 for sub projects and other numbers I've seen.
It's our form of Wikiocracy, and I think it's a good idea.
Anthere, I would love to discuss this and participate in anyway possible.
Regards,
Damian Finol