[Foundation-l] Wikimedia Foundation in 5 years - Giant brainstorming - a game with rules.
James D. Forrester
jdforrester at gmail.com
Tue Aug 30 17:54:32 UTC 2005
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Delphine Ménard wrote:
[Snip]
> You will find below a grid of what we think needs to be included in a
> five year plan for the Wikimedia Foundation. You may fill all parts,
> or just some, as suits you. You may also give details on how to get
> there, or not. You're free to say anything that goes through your
> head. Your ideas should go on this list.
[Snip]
> *Board and management
I imagine that by this time we will probably have a steering committee
of some sorts as well as an executive committee, splitting the functions
of the Board somewhat - the former is more what normally constitutes a
"board", whereas the latter is normally accomplished by the executive
officers who we now have begun to (ever-so-slightly) separate from the
Board.
The role of President is a semi-steering, semi-executive figure-head
one, one which I feel Jimbo would like to fill, and would be involved in
both the Board and the Executive Committee (for want of better terms),
but would not be the lead in either. The Chair should be a separate,
neutral figure (along the lines of European Chairs who are there almost
as secretaries, guiding the discussions along and being in charge of
their votes). As for membership, as well as the Chair and President
(neither of whom would normally 'vote' per se), the Board should have
three members directly elected by the general editor population, and a
further three appointed there by the chapters collectively. It would
have (at least) one paid secretary.
> *Staff (the positions, the roles, whether they're paid or not)
The top level of staff would form the Executive Committee - as well as
the President, there would be:
* Executive Officer,
The EO would work on general management and co-ordination, as well
as major partnerships and co-operation (e.g. with the UN). Under the
EO would be a few secretaries to just keep up with all the work they
will have.
* Finance Officer,
The FO would be responsible for managing all aspects of the
finances, both raising and expending. Under the FO would be the
Grants Officer, the Fundraising Officer, and one (or more)
professional accountants.
* Internal Communications Officer,
The ICO would be responsible for internal communications, making
sure that the top and bottom of organisation all knew what the
others were doing, including a massive continuous translation
service.
* External Communications Officer,
The ECO would be responsible for external communications - press
relations as well as public relations generally.
* Legal Counsel
The LC would deal with legal problems (which we will no doubt have
lots of, opportunistic suits, etc. :-(), and would advise the ExCom
and the Board. The LC would no doubt have a legal team working under
them, possibly an externally contracted-in company like Delphine has
suggested.
* Operations Officer,
The OO would be responsible for operations, including development.
Under the OO would work the Development Officer and the Hardware
Officer.
* Chapter Officer
The CO would co-ordinate with the local chapters. Not sure what this
will involve just yet, so I don't know what more to say.
* Research Co-ordination Officer
The RCO would be responsible for helping research, by both internal
and external parties, and would work in close partnership with the
Operations Officer to effect this (for matters of development
research, for example). Possibly would work under the OO instead of
along-side, indeed.
* Lobbying Officer
The LO would help the Foundation lobby for freedom of information
and press (e.g. against still-further extended copyright laws, or in
favour of press freedom, etc.)
> *Budget
No idea. Quite possibly vast; a few million Euros a year, certainly.
> *Fundraising scheme
Twice-annually there would be a fundraising effort for personal
donations, but a large amount of the funding would come from large
philanthropic and governmental organisations.
> *Philantropic activity and outreach to get our content widely
redistributed
The EO would work with outside agencies (printers, etc.) and
distribution organisations to help accomplish our goals with giving the
world all the information we can.
> *Projects
Hopefully Wikipedia will be recognised as a sub-project of Wikibooks. ;-)
More seriously: maturing of the projects, especially Wikibooks if helped
along by environmental improvements, into a much more "natural" project.
I don't really see that there would be much scope for further front-end
projects.
On the back-end, however, I can foresee a great effort in data-driven
projects - a Wikidata-based repository of direct facts that can be then
woven into each of the front-end projects in a "live" way - as well as
consolidation of our two rather disparate media efforts into one.
> *Content objectives
Not sure. We should see where the community takes us, really, and
support that, rather than trying to push people towards something
specific. Having said that, of course, a Wikipedia 1.0 would be very
nice ("sifter"-based, naturally - leverage the power of the community,
which is what makes us great, into the venture).
> *Software objectives
Broadening of MediaWiki into being not "merely" the best possible
article wiki we could have, but also a data- and media- repository and
sharing facility.
> *Relationship between chapters and parent organisation
The chapters would be involved in purely local matters, of course, but
most of their efforts would be devoted to working on international
projects organised and led by the Foundation. My view is of quite a
centralised system, like the ICRCRC has.
> *Relationships with the outside world (PR, partnerships, etc.)
I imagine UNESCO will want to work slowly with us. Certainly, funding
would be nice (absolute editorial independence would of course be a
cast-iron requirement before any relations were entered into). Others
include the EU and the Commonwealth, and I'm sure there are many more
international and internationalist pro-education groups out there which
would love to give us money, if only we could get to them.
- ----
This is all probably both horribly naïve and unreachable goals, and
tremendously unpopular with the rest of you. Ah well. :-)
Yours sincerely,
- --
James D. Forrester
Wikimedia : [[W:en:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]
E-Mail : james at jdforrester.org
IM (MSN) : jamesdforrester at hotmail.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFDFJ1Ykn3kUxZyJx0RAiDaAJ9y6yFMUq2x3rbnJfapY51voP39rACfUT6O
aXmR0ZRfmAMxMhHrmbmzC9A=
=rzCi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the foundation-l
mailing list