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

[Birgitte SB]

--- Yann Forget <yann at forget-me.net> wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> Samuel Klein wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 7:36 AM, Thomas Dalton
> <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 14/03/2008, Samuel Klein <meta.sj at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>  > no English means no participation?  That part
> I definitely disagree with.
> >>
> >>  What's you alternative suggestion, then? Are you
> willing to pay for
> >>  all the real time translators?
> > 
> > Translators for what?  I haven't heard a clear
> description of what
> > people would be working on, elaborating, or
> developing that would be
> > improved by everyone speaking a single language to
> one another.    If
> > we have a group of people who care strongly about
> improving the
> > cross-project community, does it matter what
> language each participant
> > speaks?
> > 
> > "Making sure each participant can express
> themselves and be understood
> > by others" is a fine requirement, requires no
> real-time translation,
> > an can be satisfied by collaboration among members
> with perhaps a few
> > interpreters in extreme cases.  "Making everyone
> communicate in one
> > language" is not.
> 
> I agree with Samuel here.
> We should be imaginative when searching for
> governance models, and not 
> focusing too much on face to face bodies. After all,
> we are essentially 
> a online community.
> 
> 1. There is no need for real life meetings for the
> Council to be effective.
> 
> 2. There is no need to have a one-day decision
> system, so we can look 
> for other procedures than a Parliament type vote.
> 
> 3. There is no need for real time translations. We
> also have time to 
> organise this body into subgroups which can then
> deal with pratical 
> subjects / projects.
> 
> I envision a body of 150-200 members in 3-4 years
> time. This should 
> allow for a better represention of small projects
> than 5 elected people 
> to the board. The most difficult task will be to
> find inventive ways to 
> so that representativity is shared by big and small
> projects. In some 
> cases, it seems easy: for example, all Indian
> languages and projects 
> together could share a common voice, among a few
> people. The provisional 
> council will need to have diplomatic skills so that
> small projects feel 
> that they have been taken into account.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Yann
> 

I want to express my support for these ideas.  My
vision of a Council very much involves the use of
smaller working groups within the Council that would
repot back to the full membership.  I also imagine
that non-Council members would be allowed to
participate in such working groups if the task at hand
interests them.  Again I very much would want to see
the full Council as a facilitator identifing and
prioritizing issues, and then bringing together people
capable of solving the issues and empowering them to
do.

Regarding smaller wikis.  If the Council members wish
to make such communities feel heard they can do so
without being from that community themselves or
reserving seats for that community.  I don't like
describing the Council in terms of representation,
because then people will vote for personal
representatives and this in my mind should be more a
working body than a governing body.  There is no need
to "govern" wikis, but the wikis do have needs that
are not being met by existing structures.

Birgitte SB


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs