[Foundation-l] Why is it...
christophe.henner at gmail.com
Thu Apr 26 09:30:27 UTC 2007
On 26/04/07, Tomasz Ganicz <polimerek at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2007/4/26, Delphine Ménard <notafishz at gmail.com>:
> > ... that every time community input is asked on a subject by a board
> > member, little to none is given?
> > And why is it that every time the same things that were put up for
> > discussion are said "approved' or "official" suddenly everyone finds
> > something to say?
> > Shouldn't it be the other around?
> IMHO the problem is that in many cases the current process of decision
> making is not transparent. Therefore the general community knows about
> the decision after it is made and start to directly affect them.
> Moreover, in many cases the reasons of decisions are not well
> explained or even not explained at all.
> There should be clear system of discussion of Board with community. For example:
> 1. The Board or a given Wikimedia committee officially announce "Let's
> start discussion about a given topic, this discussion is important,
> because The Board or Committee is about to make crucial decision -
> discussion will end at: give a date".
> 2. The discussion is on
> 3. The Board summarizes the main conclusions of discussion putting it
> on meta page.
> 4. The Board announce officially the decision with detailed
> explanation of reasons on Foundation wiki and also broadcast it to all
> whom this decision affects.
> 5. If the "wild" discussion is still going on - it is simply ignored.
> Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
As far as I know it's almost like that, except for the ending date.
Usually a board member announce the start of a discussion, then
discussion is held, a decision is taken, and then the final decision
Actually, few go to discuss it and a lot (note it's always the same
persons who are moaning :) ) moans ...
So the question is what's missing? Communication? What do you need
more than the mails ? Implication ? How could the volounteers be more
involved than actually?
Personnaly I don't thing anything missing in the
communication/implication about the decisions of the board (lack of
communications on other grounds but this is not the place to discuss
it :) ). so nothing is missing perhaps there's too much of "something"
More information about the foundation-l