Ariel Glenn writes:
> I'd like to see more complete minutes that get published more frequently;
> suspect the members of the Board would love it if they could make it

Minutes review doesn't need to be prolonged; the longer you wait the less
participants remember.  Online board votes can be closed with a week of
discussion and four days to vote:

If there is a dedicated scribe, rough minutes can be taken in a shared doc,
available during the meeting.  The fastest board I've been on spent 5
minutes at the end reviewing the draft minutes + any decisions made, and
shared the results right away.  This also helped reinforce any next steps
committed to.

If on the other hand draft minutes aren't available right away, you have to
whip people to look & respond (it helps for the whip to be a member of the
group, not the scribe, who might not want to press the point), and it's
easy for other events to intervene and lead to unexpected delays (since any
event can seem more urgent or important than this routine task).

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
New messages to:

Reply via email to