[Wikipedia-l] Re: Time to set up Wikimedia ProjectCommittees

[Alex R.]

From: "Ray Saintonge" <saintonge at telus.net>
> Anthere wrote:
>
> >> And...I think that is just about it.

> The type of charter that you envision should have come first before the
> by-laws.  Once the "charter" was formally accepted the by-laws would
> empower the Trustees to guarantee its being a core principle.

Bylaws are just a requirement for applying for a tax exemption. There
is no reason that a some kind of "Charter" document be adapted and
the bylaws could be changed if there is something inconsistent.

Look at Canada, they had a constitution (Act of 1867) for more than
100 years before they adopted a Charter.

> What should have been a credible first draft of the by-laws has by
> virtue of overtly dictatorial adoption become a lightning rod for
> criticism.  It has thus been a counterproductive process, and could even
> be seen by some as an encouragement to establish forks.  Ownership in a
> project depends as much on the intangibles as on the material goods.

I think there is a confusion about what the Wikipedia community is
versas the means of production, i.e. Wikimedia provides the means,
we provide the community, not the other way around. I see no reason
to have a few trustees who are making sure the money is spent
for the not-for-profit purpose to which Wikimedia was founded. All
this talk about "dictators" is a bit overblown IMO, but then again,
who am I?

>  For many of us the selfless commitment of time has been the price of
> ownership, and the mere suggestion that the kid who brought the bats and
> balls can take them all away is bound to send some scurrying to find
> alternative solutions.
>
> In a legal sense the Board of Trustees CAN do anything it wants, but it
> should never emphasize that.  Rather it should emphasize a hands off
> approach, and a commitment to defend core principles without meddling
> beyond that.  That commitment should also be seen as a separate
> commitment by *every* individual member of that Board, reinforced by the
> way in which they participate in plain view across the project.

As far as I know none of those Trustees participate in any of the Wikipedia
projects and even if they did, would it matter, would they have any more
rights than anyone else to edit a page? NO.

They are just trustees to make sure that we can continue having an
organization
and the funding need to buy new hardware. The minimal amount of oversight
they have is just needed to create some boundaries so that Wikipedia does
not turn into a bunch of vanity sites. I think anyone would say that
Wikipedia
has gotten so big that noone can really stop it. A lot of what it is comes
from
collaboration and the more people that get involved the more that seems to
be
true.

Alex756