[Foundation-l] Community Assembly

[Chad]

As I pointed out on Wikipedia Weekly earlier this week (Ep. 49 hasn't come
out yet), the Board /must/ be involved in the creation of new projects (note:
this is new *projects*, not new *languages*). When we launch a new language,
it is fairly trivial to add a new subdomain, launch a new instance of
the software,
and run. However, when a new project (ie: Wikinews, Wikispecies) is launched,
the Board must remain involved. This is due to fiduciary
responsibilities (purchasing
of the new domain name) and brand responsibilities (new trademark to handle).

-Chad


On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 6:17 AM, Pharos <pharosofalexandria at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 7:58 AM, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2008/5/13 Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com>:
>>
>>
>>  > The astute reader will, by now, have noticed a certain similarity
>>  > between these approaches. If it wasn't working the first time, simply
>>  > naming it "governance" won't make it work better the second time...
>>
>>  I omitted to include a conclusion here. Ooops.
>>
>>  What we need to do is to actually figure out what governing *needs*
>>  done - what issues aren't getting decided now that need thrashed out?
>>  - and then work out why it is our existing structures don't let us do
>>  that.
>>
>>  Simply arguing over which new theoretical structure we should install
>>  on top of what we already have is doomed to failure, because we're
>>  arguing in a vacuum...
>
> The greatest needs for governance would in my opinion would be
> developing policy for new languages and new projects (or, possibly,
> merging projects).
>
> Thanks,
> Pharos
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>