[Foundation-l] "Expertise" board seats: the NomCom invites your feedback

[Michael Bimmler]

On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 12:48 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I believe a guide stating, that these are the sample goals that you should
>> incorporate into your bylaws, would be very helpful.
>> Also a list of activities based on the other chapters, in a
>> choose-all-that-applies fashion would also be helpful.
>
> That would be very helpful. While some modifications may be required
> to make them fit the requirements of each jurisdiction, the basic idea
> should be the same everywhere. I know our board spent a LONG time
> discussing the objects of the charity.
>

That's very interesting, as I just wrote about my opposite experience.
But as said, I think it is a good idea to draft a framework with
general aims sentences etc. However, you could start questioning the
"independent chapters" bit somewhat, if every chapter has exactly the
same "Aims and Purpose" paragraph afterwards...
I think there is also a lot of value in chapters deliberating what
they want to do, where they want to set their focus etc. One chapter
might more be into technical development, one into educational
projects, one into publishing, one into soliciting images and so on
and so on. I oppose restricting this latitude. So, on second thought,
I would rather want to set up a document saying "This is 'acceptable':
A, BC, D, E, F and others'. The following will lead to disapproval:
'Represent Wikimedia Foundation in Country X; Be the Operator of the
French language Wikipedia; Elect the ArbCom of German Wikibooks etc."'
  We receive always many different sets of aims, and we make sure that
we only point out when we actively disapprove of something and I don't
think we should start saying "Hey, this is a new / slightly different
formulation, it's not in our framework, change this".

M.

-- 
Michael Bimmler
mbimmler at gmail.com