Hi fellow Wikimedians,

If we are seriously going to consider an expanded Community Council as an
alternative to WMF BoT reform, we need to have a real discussion about what
"devolution" would mean, and what specific responsibilities we think should
be given up, and distributed to a broader community governance.

For example:

Should the WMF BoT devolve a non-core portion of the budget?  How would the
core portion be defined, and the non-core aspects?
Should the WMF BoT devolve aspects of the approval or closing of sister
sites? (Wiktionary, Wikidata, Wikinews, a potential genealogy project)
Should the WMF BoT devolve aspects related to Wikimania and related
regional meetings?

Thanks,
Pharos

On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Emmanuel Engelhart <kel...@kiwix.org>
wrote:

> On 28.02.2016 15:53, Brion Vibber wrote:
> > I just want to split out a concept that came up in the big threads of the
> > last few days:
> >
> > Some members of the WMF Board of Trustees are giving strong signals
> (like,
> > saying it outright) that the BoT can't fully take on the role of movement
> > leadership or community representation. Not because they think it
> shouldn't
> > happen, but because structurally and legally and practically the board of
> > Wikimedia Foundation Inc has different roles to fill.
> >
> > I think we should consider what roles and structures we *do* want as
> > members of the Wikimedia movement community. And I think we should think
> > about that and talk about that carefully before rushing into details like
> > board reform.
> >
> > Perhaps we should explicitly accept WMF as a "first among equals" org
> > within the movement, with specific roles like tech development and
> > fundraising (or other emphases as well) while other orgs concentrate on
> > different specific issues. Or even just "one among equals" that happens
> to
> > have specialized in those roles.
> >
> > This probably means we should think about "umbrella" structures to
> > coordinate and represent and look forward.
> >
> > And that's something we should *definitely* not rush into. If a mismatch
> in
> > hopes for what the WMF BoT can and should do has been a factor in
> > communication and leadership issues in the past, then it's very important
> > we not make the same kinds of mistakes in any new structures that might
> be
> > needed.
>
> Delighting to read this. That said, the path to achieve this looks
> pretty challenging. Would the WMF be able to organize such a move and
> "give-up" parts of its duties/activities to better focus on core business?
>
> Emmanuel
>
> --
> Kiwix - Wikipedia Offline & more
> * Web: http://www.kiwix.org
> * Twitter: https://twitter.com/KiwixOffline
> * more: http://www.kiwix.org/wiki/Communication
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to