On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Alice Wiegand <[email protected]>wrote:
> I know that I wasn't very active the weeks before - but who was? I > absolutely understand that you are trying to keep this thing alive and push > it forward. But today it looks more like a board-thing than it ever has > looked like. It is ok to have the board in charge to get a result, to lead > the process and to set milestones and deadlines. But now it seems that > charter and additional documents were written by a board member, to be > discussed at the upcoming board meeting, to then be introduced to "the > movement" by the board. > I just don't believe that you will get the necessary support from all > concerned parties with this approach. I am with Lodewijk and his concerns > here. > To come to an end of this nagging mail: I still think that it is possible > to work on the movement roles thing cooperatively. But it needs more than > only board intention, it needs to bind parallel initiatives like the > concrete chapters council ideas and it needs to be more communicative. > Rearrange the movement roles core group, redefine the core tasks of the > group and ask for new participants. Let us try to not just bury this group > without a single word of sorrow, but let us bury it honestly with a deep > and public regret if it doesn't make sense to reanimate it. > > Just looked at this - the last thread on this list (before the current one). Agree with the general sentiments about re-arrangement, re-defining etc. Best Bishakha
_______________________________________________ Movementroles mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/movementroles
