[Foundation-l] Beyond "ad" or "not ad"

[Erik Moeller]

On 12/28/06, Titoxd at Wikimedia <titoxd.wikimedia at gmail.com> wrote:
> 3) It can be considered common courtesy to indicate that Virgin was donating
> funds. That said, having a logo prominently displayed is a question that has
> its merits, and it should be discussed for future fundraisers.

Certainly.

> 4) This shows a need for greater community consultation by the Board;
> however, the Board cannot be all places at all times, so it would be nice to
> think of ways of getting more "rank and file" users to participate in
> foundation-level decisions. How can Wikimedia accomplish that?

There was a discussion on internal-l, though given how hurried this
fundraiser was, I don't feel the group that was consulted had much
influence on the outcome. In general I view the "internal-l / internal
wiki" group as the right one for influencing decisions which require
confidentiality, and the broader community as the correct one for
general consultations which do not.

There is an RfA like process by which people who are currently not
part of the internal group can be proposed to be given access, and use
of this process has increased significantly in recent weeks. In
general, the internal group consists largely of people from chapters,
committees, or those who have shown some other involvement with
Wikimedia.

I prefer this proceess to an elected council, because ideally, these
two groups are much more dynamic, much more inclusive, and access to
the smaller group is meritocratic in nature. We need to discuss the
procedures for internal-l and internal wiki more openly, though, so
people from the outside can comment on whether they are fair.
Currently, access to internal is governed by the following Board
resolution:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution_chapters_committee/Access_to_internal
-- 
Peace & Love,
Erik

DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.