[Foundation-l] Meta-arbcom (was: the foundations of...)

[Chad]

The only issue is that most of all of the projects /lack/ an arbcom or
oversight body,
sans administrators. Saying "ArbCom will serve as the body" is basically saying
"let the main projects lead." Not the best idea, IMHO. Two two
positions should be
mutually exclusive. Although one might serve in both capacities, they do so
as two different things, not as "ArbCom on MetaCom."

Just my 0.02USD.

Chad

On Jan 4, 2008 6:21 PM, FloNight <sydney.poore at gmail.com> wrote:
> I was thinking of a combination of stewards and members from elected ArbComs.
>
> Having a blend might work best. Keep some connection to the local
> community as well as meta.
>
>
> Maybe the steward members would be permanent and the ArbCom members
> would serve as a pool that could be called to work on a particular
> case.
>
> I think we can think creatively to come up with a formula that best
> serves the needs of the Foundation and the Community.
>
> Sydney
>
>
> On Jan 4, 2008 6:08 PM,  <daniwo59 at aol.com> wrote:
> > Why couldnt the stewards serve as the basis of this meta-arbcom. They were
> > elected, and they represent diverse projects.
> >
> > Danny
> >
> >
> >
> > **************Start the year off right.  Easy ways to stay in shape.
> > http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>