Mostly agree with SJ here, with one exception: I do think that some standing committee to rule on conduct issues is necessary to be community elected (not sure if I understood SJ correctly that he was not in favor of this though). Lets call it some version of separation of powers, and a necessary process effort to ensure trust in that system. 

But in general, I agree that while consultations and community decisions are important, we have to get smarter at them. This is in part being selective with how we advertise things (be cautious with the use of your megaphone), more structured and accessible off-cycle engagement (reducing the all-importance of formal processes) and indeed better delegation. 

Best,
Lodewijk

On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 10:27 AM Evelin Heidel <scannopolis@gmail.com> wrote:
+1 to this, my perception is that we're wasting a lot of volunteer's + staff time + resources into complex governance processes without clear results. In theory, the reason why you want this much transparency & process is to make sure decision making (and in turn resources) are allocated fairly, but in practice so much bureaucracy makes it very hard for people to participate, leading to even more inequality.

It's a complex balance to strike but definitely the current initiatives are not even a good aim to begin with.

cheers,
scann
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/4ZXLHIUOCI4BCCH4PC5DZT4W2ACIWF5L/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org