In a message dated 1/22/2011 2:15:11 PM Pacific Standard Time, holtzermann17@gmail.com writes:
As you indicated, a core group started things, and for the most part these people are still around and have the power to write checks and so forth. However, it's not as if they rule with an iron fist or anything like that. Most discussions seem to happen in public mailing lists, and the people who have the power to sign checks seem pretty adamant that that's where "decisions" are made too.
There is no evidence that those who are at the top, have any inclination whatsoever to be subject to vote. There are no votes for any board members, nor any officers. All positions are appointed by those at the top.
That's not any sort of "open governance" of which I'm aware. It's the complete opposite. It's an oligarchy.
There is no path, nor even any possibility of any person gaining any form of power within P2PU outside of those who currently rule. That's how it stands today.
That's my critique.
Will Johnson
Hi Will:
There is no evidence that those who are at the top, have any inclination whatsoever to be subject to vote. There are no votes for any board members, nor any officers.
Actually P2PU is in the process of incorporating as a US-based nonprofit and this nonprofit will surely have all the standard features (board elections, transparent accounting, and so forth). At present it is a young organisation, not even a legal entity. They've followed the "try it and see what happens" model. Both the project's leadership and the contributing volunteers deserve credit for that - and the project funders, let's not forget!
Anyway, I personally see the current organisation as *very* responsive, through a consensus model, and I think this will continue to be an important part of their organisational culture in the foreseeable future.
There is no path, nor even any possibility of any person gaining any form of power within P2PU outside of those who currently rule.
I think there is a specific form of power (or some other feature) that you feel needs to exist within the organisation that doesn't, you (or anyone) can bring it up in the community mailing list and get a response. You can also contribute to the development process on github, or volunteer to help out with the project in any other way. If you're simply put off by P2PU's current lack of bureaucratic structure, you can wait a bit and give them another try when they become a more formal organisation.
Joe
wikiversity-l@lists.wikimedia.org