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 <m...@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@lists.wikimedia.**org <Wikimedia-l@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@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
