[Foundation-l] Volunteer Council - A shot for a resolution

[Milos Rancic]

Discussion about languages went far a way from its initial meaning.
So, before other things, I would try to give an explanation about this
issue:

- The best which language communities may get is one representative
per language. Even we decide for that path, one representative per
language will be something which would be achieved in five or more
years. Until that, for example, Maltese language may be represented
with one representative together with all small Mediterranean
languages.

- Particular projects may be represented only when they pass some
criteria and projects which have below 10 "very active" users wouldn't
be qualified for a representative at all.

- Project types (Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Commons...) should be
represented, too. So, if someone is a good Wikinewsian they have a
good chance to be a representative of the whole Wikinews. Again,
project type size should reflect a number of representatives.

- Meta is one of the particular projects (or project types) and people
already involved in meta jobs should be represented, too.

- We may even give to the Board right to have some number of appointed
delegates (Board members are chosen according to the proportional
system, so they have some rights in the community).

But, the exact proportion and the exact path should be carefully found.

If we don't use some similar way for electing representatives, we
would get one of the next things:

- Steward-like structure. There are two stewards from Serbia (7-10
millions of inhabitants/speakers, one language project), but no one
from India (1 billion, a number of language projects), no one from
Muslim world (1 billion, a number of language projects).

- Board as ultra-mega-super-body which decides not only about
finances, but about weather, gravity etc.

On 3/14/08, Ziko van Dijk <zvandijk at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Let's imagine some one "discriminated" from a small country, small language,
>  small Wikipedia, a Maltese for example. He is one of only 5 people active in
>  that Wikipedia. But he speaks Maltese, English and Spanish, and is active in
>  Wikimedia Commons and contributes to Meta. If we would have a "tribal
>  system" (voting via ethnic divides / languages), he would hardly have a
>  chance to get into the Council. But in an open system, I would certainly
>  give him my vote.
>
>  I have dealt with those questions in my Wikimedia Federation plan
>  http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Federation
>  giving everyone the possibility to become an "individual member", if he has
>  made enough edits. The experience from the open voting for the board showed
>  us that it works to provide the body with people from different countries.
>  In my opinion a Council should not be discussed seperately from the board
>  and the community and the chapters. The final goal should be to have a
>  functionable system for the whole of the Wikimedia world.
>
>  Maybe the board - by now the most democratic organ we have -
>  1. creates a commission (no more than ten persons, at least with one legal
>  expert) to discuss the main questions of the future system
>  2. accepts or modifies the commission's final report
>  3. creates a new commission (20 people) to write the new bylaws
>  4. submits the new bylaws to a referendum of the whole community.
>
>  Ziko
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  --
>
> Ziko van Dijk
>  Roomberg 30
>  NL-7064 BN Silvolde
>
> _______________________________________________
>  foundation-l mailing list
>  foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>