SJ, Aside from the questions being on Meta (which they soon will), and the one-person authority - this is very close to the process we are working from now.
Bence describes it a bit more, but basically a request comes in, someone is assigned it, we ask them some questions, if that person feels okay or doesn't have questions, they send the info to the group, post a resolution, and we vote. Realistically, getting a response to the questions is oddly a much lengthier process than I would have imagined. We usually try to wait for confirmation before we post announcements of approvals on-lists, and some groups do not consider themselves approved until the legal paperwork is signed. I am working on some Meta-wiki based forms (similar to what grants does) to allow folks to start the process there rather than via email. -greg On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Sam Klein <sjkl...@hcs.harvard.edu> wrote: > Thanks, Bence and Greg. I appreciate all of the thought going into this. > Can you describe the groups that might have been problematic as UGs? > I think both becoming and stopping to be a UG should be a simple process. > > > It looks like the main steps are > > a) appointing a liaison > b) having some standard questions answered (presumably not many) > c) drafting / approving a resolution (presumably always the same language) > > with an optional step of > d) reviewing bylaws > > Nathan's idea is a good one. LangCom does something like this for > handling some of their requests - any member can resolve the matter, > informs the committee, and the committee has the option (basically > never exercised) to override over the next few days. > > > Here's a possible alternate process, for instance: > > 0) Have a set of standard Meta-form that is filled out in order to > apply. Applicants can answer them without any discussion or liaison. > > 1) Any group answering those questions becomes a provisional user group. > > 2) Any AffCom member can review the answers from 0, thereby becoming > the liaison. They can approve the group, recommend it for further > review, or reject it as incomplete. > > 3.1) If further review is needed, this can take an extra week for > discussion by the committee. > > 3.2) If no further review is needed, the committee is informed of the > result (approve or reject) and the reviewer. This can be done in > batches: if many user groups are created on a single day, a single > email update can note how each group was reviewed, and by whom. > > 3.3) At the same time, the group can ask any questions it has of its > liaison. > > This would make the process as simple as filling out a form, which was > the original goal. I know that we currently require separately 4) > signing a agreement with the WMF, but I believe this could be > simplified in the future, to automatically grant certain trademark > uses to groups that have been approved. > > > A bylaws review does not need to be part of the UG recognition > process, as far as I can see. AffCom can separately engage groups to > help them in their development, including such aspects of governance. > > Regards, > Sam > > On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Bence Damokos <bdamo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Sam, > > > > If all the steps could happen at the same time, and decisions were made > by > > a single person, then the process could indeed be done in 30 minutes > under > > ideal circumstances (a person being 24/7 online, and all information > being > > available at the time of application). > > > > However, currently there are a number of checks and procedural safeguards > > in place that add to the process and utilize the knowledge and wisdom of > > the whole AffCom. > > After taking into account such practicalities as limited and > > non-overlapping volunteer schedules (i.e. non-work time, non offline time > > across different time zones) of both the applying group and the group > > processing the application, a few weeks seem to be the ideal we can aim > for > > at this point without giving up guarantees of due diligence. > > > > As a breakdown of this idealised process, see: > > https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/meta/9/97/User_group_process.svg > > > > Best regards, > > Bence > > > > P.S.: I myself have argued for the 30 minute recognition process many > > times, but at the same time understand that the movement relies on the > > "Affcom seal of approval" to mean something, which in turn requires a bit > > deeper due diligence somewhere along the line. > > > > > > On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Samuel Klein <meta...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Quick question: > >> > >> > The ultimate goal is for the user group recognition > >> > process to be shortened to a few weeks. > >> > >> When the user group model was proposed, the idea was that this should > >> take no more than 15 minutes. What currently takes time? > >> > >> Sam > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > >> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > -- > Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266 > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
