Speaking from my non-Wikimedia experiences with nonprofit boards, I think Risker makes some good points.
Even a very good notetaker is going to make mistakes. There are things said they accidentally didn’t hear, they misunderstood what someone was saying, or simply summarized a point using wording that doesn’t sound quite right to the person who said it. Note taking is a different skill from dictating ever word, and when a non-messenger is summarizing for messengers, things tend to need edits before they are considered “final”. However, that said, I do agree that our Board should be striving to do this faster than has been done recently. Regarding recording meetings, I have seen this tried before, and do not believe it is what we are really looking for. In reality, as Risker noted, it changes the behavior of participants - and usually not in an effective way. A lot more time is spent in meetings pondering the “right” way to say something before you say it. When it’s not being recorded, people are more inclined to offer early and incomplete thoughts. Perhaps it is good for people to pick their words more carefully first, but in my experience, usually makes the meetings less effective, and just results in a lot more “behind the scenes” dealmaking and conversations. I believe these types of meetings are most effective when they are a safe space to talk through complex problems. Additionally, I feel I should note there is a very real difference between Wikimedia Foundation and the governments we are sometimes compared to. WMF does not enjoy the same legal protections as governments do, and our movement’s or Foundation’s public meeting documentation are not free from threats of defamation/libel lawsuit threats (which Govt. meetings are free from). The end result for organizations I have seen try this is that a lot less gets said in meetings out of fear of being sued. The only way to really offset that would be to create a large legal fund to prepare, but even then, who wants to the Board member that has dipped into the legal fund half a dozen times in their terms? Also, is a legal fund defending potentially offensive things said during Board meetings the best use of our donors’ dollars? I absolutely 100% agree that work needs to be done to help both the organization and our Board rebuild trust, and some of that needs to be either putting information out in better ways, and making sure info IS out there. I also understand and have seen this particular set of ideas come up as solutions for similar problems elsewhere. However, I do feel I should point out that like some ideas that sounded good and logical on paper, when it was tried out, the results were disappointing. It is entirely possible we’ll be the exception, but I’m not personally very confident in that. As such, I think we should ponder ways to make the notes posting process better, and ways that the Board can improve communication outside of their official meetings. Plus, let’s be honest, the meetings are not where everything is happening anyway. I want to know about the whole picture, not just that part of it. -greg (User:Varnent) > On Mar 3, 2016, at 10:36 AM, Brion Vibber <bvib...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > > On Mar 3, 2016 7:00 AM, "Risker" <risker...@gmail.com> wrote: > Those who think it's an easy task that should be >> able to be done practically after the meeting is over tend to have no real >> experience with writing and managing minutes at the international >> non-profit board level and may not fully understand why it it is important >> that they are correct before they're published. Publicly presenting an >> early, uncorrected draft will lead to nothing but tears, but there are 9 >> board members (plus individual presenters) who have to read, correct and >> approve [sections of] the minutes. The WMF Board is not and should not be >> the most important person in the lives of any of our board members. > > What sort of problems are envisioned from public drafting of minutes lead > by a dedicated secretary/minute-wrangler (ideally a professional staff > member with experience doing this and enough time to dedicate to it rather > than double-booking a trustee or a C-level)? > > -- brion > >> >> Risker/Anne >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines >> New messages to: 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 > New messages to: 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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
