On 8/18/05, Delphine Ménard <notafishz(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I personally strongly believe that the organisation *is not* a wiki,
that the learning process is longer and that unfortunately, when you
make a mistake, nobody can just revert what mistake you have made, you
have to assume the consequences. In that, I believe our actual board
has done a good job. I can understand that they feel a bit lonely
sometimes, as there is no "edit" button on whatever decision they
make, and they are indeed carrying the weight of it on their
shoulders. The only *wiki* thing I personally would allow in this case
is "assume good faith" ...
I'm glad someone finally pointed this out - a wiki governs the
mechanics for collaborative document writing. It does not provide a
blueprint for running a legal entity with financial obligations and
time sensitive decision making.
As Delphine said, there are things from the spirit of wiki that we can
and should carry over - transparency, volunteerism
(self-identification for tasks), assume good faith. Others, like
phantom authority and rollback (anyone/everyone having veto-power)
don't have a place at the board/officer level. To sooner we realize
not all wiki concepts map over, the better.
-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)