[Wikitech-l] Re: TDF is looking for community representatives

So i think you would want a compromise approach with the email. Having the email be 20 pages long would be bad, but its still possible to have more of a "hook" without turning it into a massive wall of text. That said, i think the lack of details in the email is not the main problem here. To attract candidates you basically have to answer the following questions: * what exactly would candidates be doing, practically speaking? The process is very opaque from the outside, and most people aren't going to sign up for it blind. * why does the committee want community members. What value does it hope to get from us? ** more specificly, to put it bluntly, are we being used as tokens to give the appearence of community consultation, or are people legitametely interested in what we have to say? Quite frankly, the current appointments of an anon, or listing fandom as a "volunteer organization" does feel a bit dehumanizing, as if the committee doesn't care who the community representitives are, as long as they can check that box. * What do committee members get out of the process? Just because we are volunteers, doesn't mean we do things purely out of the goodness of our hearts. These questions weren't really answered anywhere, which i expect reduced interest. For me personally, some other factors that came to mind: * This is a committee of like 40 people. I've never seen a group of more than 5 people that is actually useful. Its unclear why you would want a committee of half the world, instead of just an open comment period (actually i suspect the answer is to force wmf staff to actually participate by having a directly responsible individual, but this approach doesn't mesh well with the community) * opinions of people currently on the committee seem quite mixed. Some are positive, but some are very negative. When WMF staff behind closed doors describe there experience on the committee in such negative terms, it really puts a damper on enthusiasm. * the opaqueness of the committee makes it unclear how feedback is actually taken and used. There is an underlying fear that the committee is a long winded process where decisions that have already been made get a rubber stamp of approval regardless of any feedback brought up. * inconsistent updates and response to feedback on wiki make the committee look dead. This puts a damper on interest. -- Brian On Monday, October 10, 2022, Erica Litrenta <elitrenta(a)wikimedia.org> wrote: