So you are proposing experienced committee keeping a close eye on actions keep help "direct" what goes off track. Sounds good :)
I wasn't personally suggesting an "acting" committee in the sense of taking action themselves. I was just speaking practically of how an *advisory* role is different from a role that is more into *action*, at least on a action planning level.. So how about you become the someoe familiar with program issues? M On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Lodewijk <[email protected]>wrote: > I'm not sure an acting committee would be what we need here. The local team > should, imho, always strive to take that task on itself. The committee we're > talking about here however, can keep an eye on progress, both before and > after the bidding - and flag for help in case things are not going as > scheduled. That way we should be able to catch problems before they become > problematic. In Alexandria Delphine also took on that role yes, but that was > /before/ she got involved hands-on. She was there both the flagging person > and the "solution" - this does not necessarily have to be the case. > > If we are going to set up such a committee, I would recommand a very small > one, of three people roughly. For specific tasks (program, jury, > organization) they can approve committees or whatever, but they should not > be doing it themselves. Just keeping an eye on progress. I'm not sure either > they necessarily need decision power, although it speaks for itself > everybody should take their input damn seriously. > > I would vouch for three types of people on such a committee: > 1) staff liaison (ie, James) > 2) someone who has experience with the broad organizing, ie a former > wikimania organizer (someone like phoebe, delphine, patricio etc) > 3) someone familiar with program issues (former program committee lead?), > ie to overview and advise the program committee > > I hope these people are explicitely /not/ involved in the organization > itself, to keep them "independent", and they should have access to > teamwiki's etc. even if in another language. Also, we should try to get at > least two continents on the committee. The committee would have a contact > person at staff, the organizing teams and maybe even (if budget gets > involved) at board level. > > best, > > Lodewijk > > 2010/6/18 Harel Cain <[email protected]> > > I do know Delphine personally (well, at least to some extent) and have been >> in touch with her on such matters. >> She's definitely another option for assuming the role of formal point of >> contact for local Wikimania teams. We just need someone (Sue?) to act and >> appoint someone to this role. >> >> Moushira, I would be very happy for us to learn from the experience of the >> Alexandria 2008 team. Unfortunately I couldn't make it there. On a personal >> level, if we see real cooperation between the Egyptian and Israeli teams - >> that would be a true achievement. We'll be very happy for as many of you as >> possible to come to Haifa. >> >> >> Harel >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Moushira Elamrawy >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Hi Harel, >>> >>> >>> Again, I'm not sure that the formality of a committee is a necessity, if >>>> that committee doesn't have a very clear role and is not put to optimal >>>> use. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Exactly. Organizing Wikimania needs action. Will the committee act? ... >>> >>>> >>>> Currently, and please everyone correct me if I'm wrong, there's not even >>>> a single person on the WMF staff that can be considered such a point of >>>> contact. Names that come to mind include Cary, James Owen and Samuel Klein, >>>> but this is not the job definition of any of them. >>>> >>> If one or two people who have the proper background and the willingness >>>> to do it can somehow be assigned (by the board? by Sue?) to act as formal >>>> point of contact for the local teams, that IMHO is more effective than a >>>> big >>>> committee. >>>> >>>> That's what I meant when I brought up the name of Délphine and her >>> role. An experienced and executive person is required. I am not sure if you >>> personally know her. I was among the team of Wikimania2008, and >>> definitly someone of that role was required. Enthusiasm and some knowledge >>> are wonderful, but they don't get things done. The amount of details related >>> to organizing such a conference need experience and knowledge. >>> >>> Devil is in the details, so it takes another devil to watch out for them. >>> >>> >>> I am unfortunately not going to make it to Poland in 2010, but I would be >>> more than happy to contribute in discussion/meetings from distant. >>> >>> Good luck in 2011 Harel >>> M >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Moushira Elamrawy < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Yes, but just on a second though: The committee is a good idea as it >>>>> will advise, and discuss, but how is this committee *actin*g? >>>>> Otherwise you need a committee to oversee the committee. >>>>> You need someone who knows what to do when. Acting. That needs one or >>>>> two people, not necessarily a committee. I am not sure if the committee >>>>> will >>>>> get things done, which is what is required. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> M >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Jeromy-Yu Chan (Jerry~Yuyu) < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I do think it is a good idea >>>>>> >>>>>> as each Wikimania we have cope with things in similar situation >>>>>> though committee is not necessary >>>>>> but we should have better knowledge management and transfer mechanism >>>>>> >>>>>> anyway if really such committee will start >>>>>> I would like to be part of it >>>>>> >>>>>> Jerry~雨雨 >>>>>> Jeromy-Yu Maximilian Chan, ARAD >>>>>> User:Yuyu | zh.wikipedia | Wikimedia HK >>>>>> ChapCom, WMF | ComCom, WMF >>>>>> Blogger | http://jeromyu.wordpress.com >>>>>> MSN: [email protected] >>>>>> also Jeromyu on twitter, plurk and most of places >>>>>> >>>>>> Tel (Mobile): +852 9279 1601 >>>>>> Laudamus quae laudentur >>>>>> Qui mollis et dissolutus est in opere suo frater est sua opera >>>>>> dissipantis >>>>>> Non clamatis hostilia, numquam esse vos accusatoribus >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 15:28, James Forrester <[email protected] >>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 18 June 2010 08:00, phoebe ayers <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> > On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Michael Snow < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >> On 6/17/2010 5:35 PM, phoebe ayers wrote: >>>>>>> >>> OK, so I guess my question is (and we talked about this on IRC >>>>>>> too) -- >>>>>>> >>> who has the power or the ability -- or who *should*, in a perfect >>>>>>> >>> world -- create such a committee? We don't have much precedent >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> >>> this. There were concerns over who or what body can create >>>>>>> >>> governance/oversight structures, particularly if this isn't >>>>>>> really >>>>>>> >>> just a Foundation issue. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >> I suppose the board could create the committee, if it's not clear >>>>>>> who >>>>>>> >> else might have the authority. Or perhaps better, the board could >>>>>>> >> authorize its creation. I think the board is a bit reluctant to >>>>>>> jump in, >>>>>>> >> partly for the reason Sue mentioned that overseeing Wikimania is >>>>>>> not >>>>>>> >> really a board-level issue (it's primarily operational rather than >>>>>>> >> strategic), but also because the board is not well placed to fill >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> >> maintain committees like this. When it becomes a situation of >>>>>>> appointing >>>>>>> >> people none of us really knows, or feeling that there are probably >>>>>>> >> people we're not aware who ought to be recruited to a committee >>>>>>> like >>>>>>> >> this, it's pretty uncomfortable to have that responsibility. But >>>>>>> if we >>>>>>> >> authorized the committee and then let the staff and experienced >>>>>>> >> Wikimania volunteers review applications or expressions of >>>>>>> interest to >>>>>>> >> join the committee, that might work out. That's kind of the >>>>>>> direction >>>>>>> >> things have moved in any case. Some of the early committees that >>>>>>> still >>>>>>> >> function have evolved to a place outside the board's immediate >>>>>>> activity, >>>>>>> >> and the current work of the governance committee is focused more >>>>>>> on >>>>>>> >> structures needed to organize the board's own functions. >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> --Michael Snow >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Yes, authorization seems right. I wouldn't really expect that the >>>>>>> > Board actually fill such a committee or even necessarily ask for >>>>>>> > direct reports. The question that came up in IRC though was where >>>>>>> > would such a committee derive its authority from (assuming it had >>>>>>> any >>>>>>> > particular authority). Perhaps the answer for this is "it doesn't" >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> > simply fills a communication and reporting role that is currently >>>>>>> > lacking. Or perhaps (my ideal scenario) we come up with a way where >>>>>>> > the interested community grants it authority by building the >>>>>>> > structure, filling the seats, etc., and that is generally >>>>>>> recognized. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > I'm interested in this case specifically of course, but I also am >>>>>>> > wondering more generally what the current state of affairs is for >>>>>>> > forming any sort of operational, community-driven committee. Of >>>>>>> course >>>>>>> > we're good at forming wikiprojects to do things that need doing, >>>>>>> but >>>>>>> > for areas that also require overlap with things that the office >>>>>>> works >>>>>>> > on, it seems tricky. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Re: scheduling a time at wikimania for discussing this potential >>>>>>> > glorious wikimania committee: yes, let's. I wanted to have a >>>>>>> reprise >>>>>>> > of the Future of Wikimania discussion from last year, anyway. How >>>>>>> > about Sunday? I'll volunteer to check with the 2011 team and other >>>>>>> > interested parties and schedule a time. This overlaps with Manuel's >>>>>>> > panel, too, but I think we need a dedicated time maybe. Stay tuned! >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > -- phoebe >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > p.s. if we get both James Owen AND James Forrester involved it will >>>>>>> be >>>>>>> > unstoppable. Powered by James^2. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pah. To disambiguate between the two of us, I will allow people to >>>>>>> refer to me as "God-Prince James", per Jimmy. ;-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> James. No, the other one. >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> James D. Forrester >>>>>>> [email protected] | [email protected] >>>>>>> [[Wikipedia:User:Jdforrester|James F.]] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimania-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimania-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l > >
_______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
