Hi all,
It's good to see the role of the WMUK committees being focused on - thank you Michael
for starting this.
However, I think it's a real shame that the committees are becoming much more advisory
than they were supposed to be when they were originally envisaged and created just a few
years ago. The charter here basically gives the committee no powers whatsoever. Compare it
with the proposal I posted in 2012 at:
https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/General_Committee_Charter
which was aimed at giving the committees some amount of delegated power to decide what
would or wouldn't happen. Instead, now we're seeing committees that may or may not
be able to give input to staff members (depending on whether staff members decide if they
want to consult the committees or not). The power balance is very much on the side of the
staff, who hold individual viewpoints (which are generally very good and worth listening
to - but they are individual viewpoints) rather than viewpoints balanced across a spectrum
of views (which is what a committee can provide). It's also worth remembering that the
staff were hired to support the community rather than the other way around...
If the priorities could be flipped here, and the committees are given the direct ability
to give recommendations to the WMUK board or to make some level of budget decisions, then
I think it's useful to continue to have the committees. If not, then I would ask why
the committees exist here...
Thanks,
Mike
On 7 May 2014, at 15:20, Fæ <faewik(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I have raised some quick comments on the talk page,
including a
question about the title "volunteer committees" as other recognized
committees not listed in the document are by definition composed and
driven by volunteers.
The document gives the impression that only committees without any
delegated powers are volunteer committees, which seems odd phrasing.
PS please allow for the fact that date on my email may be up to a day
earlier than the actual posted date.
Fae
On 7 May 2014 15:07, Michael Maggs <Michael(a)maggs.name> wrote:
I have made a proposal for discussion. See the
Engine Room:
The following resolution was approved by the Wikimedia UK board in December
2013:
[We should] redefine the role and purpose of the non-board committees to
give them greater prominence, and if need be re-constitute and re-vitalise
them with greater volunteer input to drive forward programmes. At present,
the roles and memberships of non-board committees are somewhat unclear, and
that has led to atrophy and lack of focus. Board/committee communication
needs to be improved, and better board support for the committees’ work is
needed. We would hope and expect that this will result in considerably
greater community involvement.
I have put up a draft charter for discussion at Volunteer committees, and
would like to hear what everyone thinks. Insofar as it's possible for a
charter to re-vitalise our committees (bearing in mind it's only people not
policy that can ultimate do that), is this a move in the right sort of
direction?
Michael
Link:
https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Engine_room#A_charter_for_our_volunteer_commi…
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK:
https://wikimedia.org.uk
--
faewik(a)gmail.com
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK:
https://wikimedia.org.uk