Oh for the love of God... You're all doing it again!
I remember when the committees were being set up nobody (!) knew exactly
what they were supposed to do. They had to organize themselves after
'incorporation'. That is a very wrong approach, IMO. Same thing is
happening now all over again.
So just stop for a second, OK?
I suggest we define issues and problems that would need
coordination/handling on meta-project level *first* and then try to
think of a way to deal with them. It may well be that some can be solved
simply by using the structures in place. For those that remain without
even the slightest idea on how to fix them we can move to actually
create something entirely new.
One example that comes to my mind right away is this:
* policy on sitenotice display (mandatory fundraising notices? or is
this up to each project?)
This could simply be ruled by WMF but would have little or no impact on
projects which are not represented on the foundation level (this list
for example). A Wikicouncil ruling would probably work better.
Try to think along those lines.
And *please* do the defining on-wiki. That's why we have meta for.
Note that I am a big fan of the Wikicouncil idea (i.e. a representative
body of some sort). But at the same time I believe that this is not
going to work properly unless we start out with the "whats" and not the
I'm going to bed. *yawn*