Rogol, I'm on the advisory board, and actively involved in related issues, but have hesitated posting in respect for Community traditions (as I learn them) and also, as a large effort emerges in journalism regarding reliable sources.
Specifically, the latter involves the News Integrity Initiative centered at the City University of NY, graduate journalism department. That's to say, I hesitate until I learn the respectful way to talk about this, and until the NII has a lot more to say. Additional constraint per the ethics of funding nonprofit journalism, per the American Press Institute: when I say something, I need to be transparent while also Doing No Harm. (The latter is surprisingly difficult.) To that effect, I gotta disclose that I provide significant funding to the NII as well as WMF. I'd appreciate your advice, and that of anyone interested in this subject. Thanks! Craig Newmark, founder craigslist On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 7:10 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <domedonf...@gmail.com> wrote: > This Board was fomed in 2007 to advise the Wikimedia Foundation, and was > required to be renewed annually. No resolution was made to do so in 2015, > so by the beginning of 2016 it had lapsed. This status is reflected at > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Advisory_Board but the corresponding page > at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board is seriously out of > date (it was written when the board was still in existence). Just about a > year ago, Dariusz assured me that "it is one of the BGC's priorities to > revise and re-ignite the Advisory Board" and indeed the BGC minutes for > April published a couple of days ago at > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_ > Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017 > show that the BGC took a paper (not made public) from Dariusz on the > subject and agreed to "submit a formal proposal to the Board". No Board > resoultion on the subject has yet been published. > > Rather confusingly, shortly after the BGC meeting, Florence wrote a page > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_ > movement/2017/Sources/WMF_Advisory_board > recording the Advisory Board's opinions on matters arising in the current > movement strategy process. So it would seem that within a fortnight of the > BGC meeting, an entity called the Advisory Board was already in existence > again. > > What is the status of the Avisory Board? Has it been reconstiuted, and if > so, when, and who are its new members? If it has not been reconstituted, > what is the status of Florence's record? If and when the Advisory Board is > reconstituted, will input from the Community for potential members be > welcome, and if so how will it be gathered? Once the Board is in operation > again, is it expected that it will interact with the Community, and if so, > what will the mechanism be for that interaction. > > "Rogol" > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l 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>
