On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
"Responsible for reviewing the
minutes". This is a lovely ideal. Can we
now be realistic? What do we really expect that "observer" to do? Will
they have input in to what the minutes finally say? Do they have approval
authority (i.e., do they get to vote on the acceptance of the minutes)?
I'm not opposed to community members observing board meetings - I suspect
many people will find them to be unexpectedly boring, with less substantive
discussion than many would expect - but the objective should be a lot more
clear. What about if they genuinely believe that the minutes (which most
of us would recognize as having been written using a template) don't
reflect or emphasize what the observer thinks were the key issues? Do they
get to put forward publicly their own version of what happened or what they
observed? Are they going to be permitted to observe the "executive
session", where even the WMF staff are out of the room? I am fine with the
general concept, but I don't think either the board or the community has
really thought through the entire process. We should get it pretty much
nailed down before it is implemented.
Minute-taking is a skill - just as is writing a featured article or
creating a featured image. Those who think it's an easy task that should be
able to be done practically after the meeting is over tend to have no real
experience with writing and managing minutes at the international
non-profit board level and may not fully understand why it it is important
that they are correct before they're published. Publicly presenting an
early, uncorrected draft will lead to nothing but tears, but there are 9
board members (plus individual presenters) who have to read, correct and
approve [sections of] the minutes. The WMF Board is not and should not be
the most important person in the lives of any of our board members.
hi Anne,
I appreciate your criticism, it definitely helps to shoot down ideas early,
before they can mature ;) What I'm getting at is trying to find a sensible
form of addressing the community's concerns without making the whole Board
meetings public (I don't think it is impossible, I basically think that it
would entirely change the dynamics of the meetings - there would be an
incentive for the community-elected members to speak up to gain political
support, for example; this idea calls for just as much shredding apart as
the "observer" one).
The observer I have in mind would not be responsible for taking the minutes
(as you've pointed out, it is a skill), but reviewing them. Anyhow, it is
just an ad-hoc idea that I think could be refined, if it was perceived as
addressing the problem of the Board meetings being overly cryptic and
secretive for the general public.
dj