Ronald A. DeMena III wrote: > Additionally, it would seem as if we the former individuals who were asked > to participate in this capacity were "quote" left out of the future > direction regardless the formal organizational structure.
That impression was probably set by me, it was unintentional, and I hope I can correct it. My intent was to find a way to create a CG that "owned" complete responsibility for the site, "staff" it with the right set of people, and then empower them to, as Glynn is fond of saying, jfdi. Unfortunately, the part about having the individuals already involved continue as leaders in the new CG fell off into the bit bucket. Sorry. I think you and I are really in violent agreement - let those who wish to do the work actually try and do the work without micromanaging, bypassing or second guessing them. I updated the wiki page to explicitly say (note bullet 3.3) > Proposal > > That the Board formally: > > * dissolve the Website Editorial Board > * disband the Website Community Group > * recharter the Website Community Group under the terms of AlanB's > original proposal with the following editorial fixes applied: > o Replace 'Community' with 'Community Group' throughout the > proposal, and replace 'promote' with 'restructure' > o Change 'Community Leaders' to 'Core Contributors' as the > proposal intended > o Add the members of the former Web Editorial Board as > potential Core Contributers to this new CG -John _______________________________________________ website-discuss mailing list [email protected]
