Hm, for quite a while, the board agenda's were published before the meetings took place. At least, for the well in advance-scheduled meetings (the regular ones). I didn't see any recently though. I think it would indeed be good to put on the list of 'possible transparency topics' to discuss...
Lodewijk On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 9:25 AM, Ariel Glenn WMF <ar...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > I'd like to see more complete minutes that get published more frequently; I > suspect the members of the Board would love it if they could make it happen > by waving a wand and have it be so. > > I was once a public observer taking notes for a Board meeting for a > different organization, and there was no way to get notes out the door with > universal agreement except to redact large parts. A lot of it involved "I > did not say that" or "I did not mean that" or "That's out of context". > Controversial topic discussions will be even harder to cover fairly without > being content-free. > > And, as others have said on this list, recording meetings often has the > side effect of moving real discussions out of the limelight back into the > shadows. If you don't believe me, check out your respective legislative > bodies ;-) > > So, given that, as Risker and others point out, "it's complicated", perhaps > we could start with a smaller step: get the agenda published within 5 days > after any meeting. This would mean publishing: the items brought into the > meeting for discussion, marking those that were actually discussed, and > those that were dropped or alternatively held over for a future meeting. > > Even this document will not be controversy free and will need to be vetted > before being released, but a 5 day period (let's say) seems manageable. > > Once we have that going smoothly we can take what's been learned from it > and apply it to summaries with a bit more detail, etc. > > Ariel > > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:19 AM, Craig Franklin <cfrank...@halonetwork.net> > wrote: > > > This sounds like an excellent strategy if you're looking to have the > board > > meetings turn into a rubber stamp for issues that have been discussed and > > decided elsewhere. > > > > Rather than solving the transparency problem through gimmicks like > wheeling > > a video camera into the board room, we should look at reasons why the > Board > > of Trustees might not feel comfortable being transparent. The only real > > solution will involve cultural change, not just on the WMF side, but also > > from the community. What can *we* as community members do to assist the > > WMF in being transparent? > > > > Although, I most certainly agree that the official minutes of meetings > > could do with a little more detail. If brevity is wit, then the existing > > minutes are positively Wildean. > > > > Cheers, > > Craig > > > > On 3 March 2016 at 16:31, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Having WMF Board meetings be open and recorded by default would be > > > a wonderful step in aligning the Board with the value of transparency. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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>
