> Since Wikimania is in July this year, perhaps we could do this there:
> public review & discussion of the WMF plan, and using that as a point of
> departure to continue the discussion of planning from WMCON.
> Sam

I would suggest not using this WMF proposed plan as a starting point for
talking about good annual plans with affiliates, both because of its scale
which is out of scope for any other affiliate, and because of the issues
and regressions with the WMF plan and process that we've already discussed
in this thread. I think it would be best to proceed on two tracks, the
first being discussions about good planning practices and development of
peer supports and tools for affiliates as we develop our plans, and a
second track about WMF's plan.

I like Risker's idea of having an outside professional review of WMF's plan
with community and affiliate input, with the caveat that I have often had
reason to think that consultants do subpar work (even those consultsnts
with expensive brand names), so the consultant will need to be selected
with great care. I think that a peer review from another public service
organization might be a good option.

Regarding Risker's point about WMF's plan lacking a sense of direction, I
am hoping that the strategic planning process will help with this, though I
must say that the WMF strategic planning process has been opaque from my
perspective,  and therefore I am wary about its potential.

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Reply via email to