Hi all, It's good to see the role of the WMUK committees being focused on - thank you Michael for starting this.
However, I think it's a real shame that the committees are becoming much more advisory than they were supposed to be when they were originally envisaged and created just a few years ago. The charter here basically gives the committee no powers whatsoever. Compare it with the proposal I posted in 2012 at: https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/General_Committee_Charter which was aimed at giving the committees some amount of delegated power to decide what would or wouldn't happen. Instead, now we're seeing committees that may or may not be able to give input to staff members (depending on whether staff members decide if they want to consult the committees or not). The power balance is very much on the side of the staff, who hold individual viewpoints (which are generally very good and worth listening to - but they are individual viewpoints) rather than viewpoints balanced across a spectrum of views (which is what a committee can provide). It's also worth remembering that the staff were hired to support the community rather than the other way around... If the priorities could be flipped here, and the committees are given the direct ability to give recommendations to the WMUK board or to make some level of budget decisions, then I think it's useful to continue to have the committees. If not, then I would ask why the committees exist here... Thanks, Mike On 7 May 2014, at 15:20, Fæ <[email protected]> wrote: > I have raised some quick comments on the talk page, including a > question about the title "volunteer committees" as other recognized > committees not listed in the document are by definition composed and > driven by volunteers. > > The document gives the impression that only committees without any > delegated powers are volunteer committees, which seems odd phrasing. > > PS please allow for the fact that date on my email may be up to a day > earlier than the actual posted date. > > Fae > > On 7 May 2014 15:07, Michael Maggs <[email protected]> wrote: >> I have made a proposal for discussion. See the Engine Room: >> >> The following resolution was approved by the Wikimedia UK board in December >> 2013: >> >> [We should] redefine the role and purpose of the non-board committees to >> give them greater prominence, and if need be re-constitute and re-vitalise >> them with greater volunteer input to drive forward programmes. At present, >> the roles and memberships of non-board committees are somewhat unclear, and >> that has led to atrophy and lack of focus. Board/committee communication >> needs to be improved, and better board support for the committees’ work is >> needed. We would hope and expect that this will result in considerably >> greater community involvement. >> >> I have put up a draft charter for discussion at Volunteer committees, and >> would like to hear what everyone thinks. Insofar as it's possible for a >> charter to re-vitalise our committees (bearing in mind it's only people not >> policy that can ultimate do that), is this a move in the right sort of >> direction? >> >> Michael >> >> Link: >> https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Engine_room#A_charter_for_our_volunteer_committees >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia UK mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l >> WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk > > > > -- > [email protected] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae > Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote. > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list [email protected] http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
