All,
Here's one idea among many that I like, but which I have no time to act on
myself.
There are *many* wikis out there that were started by professionals, which
gained some useful content, and then basically folded up and died. It's
kind of sad; their work shouldn't go to waste, should it?
Well, we could, on the wiki, make a list of such wikis, and then send
e-mails to their organizers, inviting them to join us and move their content
to CZ (if it's appropriate, of course).
I'd be happy to hear from someone who wants to do this as an official
representative of CZ (see attached), but you wouldn't have to be, either.
If I were doing this, I'd place a link to the list of wikis here:
http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Project_Home#Recruitment_and_Admission
We have got a few applications for new leadership permissions--thanks
fellows.
--Larry
--- Begin Message ---
All,
Please read this--this is a potentially project-changing mail.
I had a bit of a brainstorm recently. The bottom line is: if you're
interested in taking charge of some new workgroup, issue, or project, write
up a plan for yourself, and send it to the Executive Committee (via me). We
want to hear from you. Details below.
==========
It really hasn't helped much to ask people to head up specific efforts,
though we certainly do need leadership in this project, and I've appreciated
it when I saw it. Recently, we did manage to get Louise Valmoria on board
as our Mailing List Manager--thanks, Louise!
We need *many* different people who could focus and organize efforts on
various issues and projects. I'd like to get lots of people started, but
talking to you and "training" you, so to speak, takes a lot of my limited
and dwindling time. But perhaps leadership recruitment and training is a
problem that can be solved in a bottom-up fashion. How?
Here's the brainstorm--I've run this by the Executive Committee, and they're
all in favor. So let's try this:
Here's a *partial* list of roles that we need people to play. Do any of
them strike your fancy? Fundraising organizer; lead copyeditor; lead
fact-checker; policy and help page editor; content partnership liason;
project lead, public domain content; lead media (or assets) coordinator; Big
Cleanup/Article Checklist lead; academic recruitment manager; new personnel
liason; lead forums manager; Web design lead (needs MediaWiki skin savvy);
workgroup coordinator; lead recruiter, chief workgroup editors; lead
personnel coordinator (someone who organizes these project leaders); etc.,
the list could go on very long, as there is much that needs to be done. In
addition, there are many people who have special projects in mind for CZ.
For example, Sorin Matei of Purdue has approached us with a couple of very
intriguing ideas; Andrew Su has another. If you want to pursue such a
project, you'll probably have to drive it yourself, because I have no time,
and probably, no one else will be as excited as you are about it.
Again, do any of the above strike your fancy? Or is there something else
you might be interested in heading up? As I've said many times in the past,
I'd like to get lots of people involved working *largely independently of
me*. I'm overworked. We need more leaders in this project. It's far more
important to me that we get off the ground than that we make every decision
according to my personal preferences. And, besides, I think people will be
a lot more motivated to take leadership roles if they define them
themselves.
So here's the idea: rather than me telling you at great length what I want
you to do, I want you to write up a project plan, including a long, detailed
"job description" for yourself, as well as how a workgroup, if one is
created, would operate. Think up a bunch of questions about the role, and
answer them. A mere role *name* means very little. Bear in mind that
you're describing a job that others, in the future, might be doing, after
your term expires. I propose to begin with two year terms (but you can
always quit early). Send your plan to me ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), and I
will forward it to the Executive Committee, which will make decisions about
new plans and personnel. Please be sure to include a CV/resume and some
proof, preferably in the form of Web links, that you are who you say you are
(unless you're sure we already know you). Preferably, please send the mail
from a non-free e-mail address. Also, indicate how many hours per week you
are willing to *commit* to your role/project.
Note: we will keep your application confidential. Also, there's no
deadline.
In response, if you and your plan are accepted,
(1) The Executive Committee will officially recognize you as a project lead.
While you can propose a title, we'll decide on that, too. (And we might
want to edit your plan.) New project leads will be listed on the (new)
personnel page:
http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Personnel
(2) If necessary, we'll set up a new mailing list and/or forum for your
issue/project (if there isn't one already).
(3) Also, as part of getting you started, you would be responsible for
crafting on the wiki (while letting me and others edit) any relevant
Citizendium policy pages--which should contain, *at least*, your job
description, which someone else might take over after your term is expired,
or you quit. It is important that you review all existing policy and make
sure your additions are seamlessly integrated.
(4) Some, but probably not all, of the new leads will be invited to join the
Executive Committee.
There are other rules that we ought to develop for these positions, as well.
For one thing, we must bear in mind that the project leads are for the most
part leaders and advocates, not decisionmakers. Decisions about content
still need to be in the hands of relevant editors and/or the Editorial
Council; about constable issues, in the hands of the Constabulary; about new
initiatives and partnerships, the Executive Committee; and, as
editor-in-chief, I want to exercise an oversight role as well, although my
role will need to be made better defined as new leaders and groups get
started.
More fundamentally, and this is a very important point, the *existence* of
these leadership positions must not be permitted to make the Citizendium
into a top-down, command-and-control, bureaucratic project. We'll always
have a wiki, and people will always be able to do what they want, when they
want, within a fairly permissive framework of rules. We *don't* want
day-to-day work on the wiki to start getting subjected to bureaucratic
decisionmaking. Hence, think of the project leads not as bureaucrats but as
community facilitators--as point people for special issues and projects.
Their job should more closely resemble that of worker bee, cheerleader, and
networker than old school Manager.
So, for example, if we get a Lead Fact-Checker in place, that mere fact must
not be taken to mean that articles must go through a rigorous fact-checking
process before approved, much less posted. Your job must be done *within*
our robust, open, bottom-up wiki system.
Finally, the fact that someone is a "point person" for an issue or project
absolutely must not be understood to mean that *only that person* may
articulate policy about the issue, or work on the project. Except in
special cases (such as Editor-in-Chief and Chief Constable), I think that we
ought to say that the project leads have a limited, carefully circumscribed
amount of *formal authority* with respect to the issue or project. I would
actually go farther to say that I personally would remove anyone who
generally insists on preventing other members in good standing from
contributing to an issue or project. Collaboration and self-starting is
what we're about--which is really what this whole initiative is about, too!
I hope you'll be interested in getting involved in this way. We need you!
--Larry
--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________
Citizendium-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/citizendium-l
