Thanks for the updates.
My perspective is that a functioning advisory board could be nice to have,
and I hope that its scope and methods of work could be articulated
somewhere such as in a charter. I think that such an arrangement would help
everyone to know their roles and have realistic expectat
Hello! Please find my answers inline.
>> What is the status of the Avisory Board?
There is no active Advisory Board at the moment, but the Board has approved
inviting new members for the year. I have added a template to the page on
Wikimedia Foundation site about it not being accurate at the mome
Hi,
the Advisory Board, as it was, and so far I can see, as it probably will
be, does not have something like a structure or a channel. It is more
like a bunch of individuals that mostly the board, and in some cases the
WMF staff may (or mostly) may not approach on specific topics. The board
I believe that the AB should have something to propose and say there, so
until it is I am not going to put any proposals forward in this respect.
Best
On Jun 27, 2017 4:39 PM, "Rogol Domedonfors" wrote:
> Are those channels proposed as part of the paper you brought to the BGC on
> the 13th Apri
Are those channels proposed as part of the paper you brought to the BGC on
the 13th April, then? Or are you ready to discuss them now? Or will the
possibility of establishing them be postponed until some time after the
Advisory Board is reconstituted?
"Rogol"
On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 11:14 AM, D
I think we should have those channels, once the body is constituted.
Best
Dj
On Jun 26, 2017 19:59, "Rogol Domedonfors" wrote:
> Dariusz
>
> Thanks for that update. You don't mention any channels for communication
> between the reconstituted Board and the Community at large, nor
> opportuniti
Thanks for the updates, Dariusz and Nat.
I thought I'd mention that in the past my impression is that the Advisory
Board was the body to which people were "retired" after serving
high-profile roles, and the AB performed little to no actual work. It
sounds like your plan is to reverse both of those
Dariusz
Thanks for that update. You don't mention any channels for communication
between the reconstituted Board and the Community at large, nor
opportunities for the Community at large to be involved in suggesting
names. I assume then that engagement with the Community is not considered
importa
Hello! The Advisory Board (AB) and its role was indeed among the BGC
priorities for this year [1]. And I have been working with the former AB
members on a concept for how the AB’s work should be organized. The concept
they came up though needs to be clarified and improved, especially on how
the AB
Le 24/06/2017 à 13:10, Rogol Domedonfors a écrit :
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.or
Craig
Thanks for your thoughtful response. There are two gneral issues around
the Advisory Board that members of the Community might be interested in.
Firstly, it seems that after having lapsed in 2015, the Advisory Board has
been reconstituted, but there has been no announcement to the Communit
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
12 matches
Mail list logo