Hi fellow Wikimedians, If we are seriously going to consider an expanded Community Council as an alternative to WMF BoT reform, we need to have a real discussion about what "devolution" would mean, and what specific responsibilities we think should be given up, and distributed to a broader community governance.
For example: Should the WMF BoT devolve a non-core portion of the budget? How would the core portion be defined, and the non-core aspects? Should the WMF BoT devolve aspects of the approval or closing of sister sites? (Wiktionary, Wikidata, Wikinews, a potential genealogy project) Should the WMF BoT devolve aspects related to Wikimania and related regional meetings? Thanks, Pharos On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Emmanuel Engelhart <[email protected]> wrote: > On 28.02.2016 15:53, Brion Vibber wrote: > > I just want to split out a concept that came up in the big threads of the > > last few days: > > > > Some members of the WMF Board of Trustees are giving strong signals > (like, > > saying it outright) that the BoT can't fully take on the role of movement > > leadership or community representation. Not because they think it > shouldn't > > happen, but because structurally and legally and practically the board of > > Wikimedia Foundation Inc has different roles to fill. > > > > I think we should consider what roles and structures we *do* want as > > members of the Wikimedia movement community. And I think we should think > > about that and talk about that carefully before rushing into details like > > board reform. > > > > Perhaps we should explicitly accept WMF as a "first among equals" org > > within the movement, with specific roles like tech development and > > fundraising (or other emphases as well) while other orgs concentrate on > > different specific issues. Or even just "one among equals" that happens > to > > have specialized in those roles. > > > > This probably means we should think about "umbrella" structures to > > coordinate and represent and look forward. > > > > And that's something we should *definitely* not rush into. If a mismatch > in > > hopes for what the WMF BoT can and should do has been a factor in > > communication and leadership issues in the past, then it's very important > > we not make the same kinds of mistakes in any new structures that might > be > > needed. > > Delighting to read this. That said, the path to achieve this looks > pretty challenging. Would the WMF be able to organize such a move and > "give-up" parts of its duties/activities to better focus on core business? > > Emmanuel > > -- > Kiwix - Wikipedia Offline & more > * Web: http://www.kiwix.org > * Twitter: https://twitter.com/KiwixOffline > * more: http://www.kiwix.org/wiki/Communication > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
