[Wikimedia-l] Democratizing the Wikimedia Foundation

[Anders Wennersten]

My answer had noting to do with these committees as such but rather that 
these types of committees and delegation of preparations for the board 
could be extended for  other areas too which would broaden the democracy.

The parliaments I know of prepare issues through standing committees and 
this is am model i advocate for extending the democracy in the Movement 
as well, and undramatize the role of the Board

Anders




Lodewijk skrev 2012-11-03 14:24:
> Hi Anders,
>
> while I appreciate all these discussions - I don't think we should try to
> solve every problem in a single discussion page. Perfection is the enemy of
> progress. I definitely think also the Affiliations Committee (formerly
> known as Chapters Committee) can be improved, and as well the GAC and FDC
> (Grants Advisory Committee / Funds Dissemination Committee). If there are
> general issues with these committees that need resolving within this
> specific field (involving community in the decision making process and
> improving transparency) you're of course more than welcome to submit them
> at the page.
>
> Best,
> Lodewijk
>
> 2012/11/3 Anders Wennersten <mail at anderswennersten.se>
>
>> After just being in our first FDC committee session, I do want to promote
>> this way of handling issue to be spread to other issue areas too.
>>
>> The FDC is a committee consisting of community members looking into on
>> specific issue area and preparing recommendation to the Board. This enables
>> broader involvement but also greater transparency, as all preparation
>> material and assessments are public.
>>
>> We also have a GAC with a similar approach and the group that took over
>> after ChapCom. Why not extend this to other areas having thing like a GLAM
>> Advisory committee, preparing material for the Board and any global
>> framework needed in the are. A software/operation advisory committee
>> overlooking everything related to our server operation and products. A
>> community advisory committee, handling issues like legal support,
>> wikimania, global arbcom etc.
>>
>> Ie democratize the preparation of issues for the board, rather then
>> discussing the internal operations of the Board
>>
>> Anders
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Patricio Lorente skrev 2012-11-03 13:47:
>>
>>
>>> Hi Ilario!
>>>
>>> "Improving transparency" is far better that "Democratizing WMF",
>>> though governance is not about "controlling": is about decision making
>>> procceses, guidance, communications... in fact, is also about
>>> transparency :)
>>>
>>> Anyway, despite the title we choose, I really think that this
>>> discussion is necessary, and that we need to improve (or even to set
>>> up) some basic rules and procedures of interaction and decision
>>> making.
>>>
>>>                                                           Patricio
>>>
>>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.**org <Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l