On 21 October 2012 19:30, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> I don't think the WMF's advisory board has been particularly
> successful or effective, so I would advise against basing WMUK's on it
> to too great an extent.
> Sitting on the WMF's advisory board is more of a sinecure than
> anything. If WMUK is
On 21 Oct 2012, at 19:30, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> On 21 October 2012 19:20, Michael Peel wrote:
>> I'd personally agree that an advisory board could be very beneficial for
>> WMUK. I've set out a first draft of what such a board could look like, after
>> looking into the WMF's advisory board set
On 21 October 2012 19:20, Michael Peel wrote:
> I'd personally agree that an advisory board could be very beneficial for
> WMUK. I've set out a first draft of what such a board could look like, after
> looking into the WMF's advisory board setup and some other background
> documents, at:
> https:/
On 13 Oct 2012, at 20:52, Andrew Turvey wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:41 PM, Tom Holden
> wrote:
> Is there a role for an advisory board? It was discussed a while back. Perhaps
> some of the long serving former board members could be invited to be on it
> (Andrew T., Joe S., Tom D.)?
>
