Mailing List Archive

On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 1:49 PM, Anthony <wikimail@inbox.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 12:49 PM, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> 2) However, what kind of mail would you have liked? You said that you
>> didn't want a boilerplate email, okay. But how do you write "personal
>> emails" to the ca. 10 applicants who we did not choose? Either you
>> keep it very short and simple ("Hi, this is to inform you that you
>> were considered but that we found Ral315 to be the most qualified
>> candidate after all"), which would be a form of a boilerplate again.
>> Otherwise, you'll have to outline for every candidate the exact
>> reasons why the successful candidate was "better" (read: more
>> qualified) than him and it's a) difficult to formulate this without
>> being impolite and b) it takes a lot of time.
>
>
> An explanation of why only one person could be accepted would be helpful,
> since you seem to be implying that this is the case.
>

Along these lines, does the mail software support giving someone permission
to approve messages only (not to change moderation status)? Seems that
pretty much anyone who can be trusted to send unmoderated posts can be
trusted to do this.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 18:56, Anthony <wikimail@inbox.org> wrote:
> Along these lines, does the mail software support giving someone permission
> to approve messages only (not to change moderation status)? Seems that
> pretty much anyone who can be trusted to send unmoderated posts can be
> trusted to do this.

I'd argue that posting from your own name is very different to judging
the content of a message from someone already flagged (by being
moderated) as potentially troublesome.

Sean

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 12:51 AM, Ral315 <wiki.ral315@gmail.com> wrote:
> [snip]
>
> As far as my list inactivity goes, I read the list on a daily basis, but
> lately I've noticed that others tend to make my points for me, and are much
> more articulate in expressing their views. I think a lot of the "top
> posters" add a significant amount to discussion and their posts are
> worthwhile; for myself, I find that the more I post, the less I tend to say.
>

I wish more people had this insight. Personally, I think Ral315 will do an
excellent job moderating the list.

Honestly, it's an administrative job folks, it's not the keys to the kingdom.

-Chad

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 6:49 PM, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2) However, what kind of mail would you have liked? You said that you
> didn't want a boilerplate email, okay. But how do you write "personal
> emails" to the ca. 10 applicants who we did not choose? Either you
> keep it very short and simple ("Hi, this is to inform you that you
> were considered but that we found Ral315 to be the most qualified
> candidate after all"), which would be a form of a boilerplate again.
> Otherwise, you'll have to outline for every candidate the exact
> reasons why the successful candidate was "better" (read: more
> qualified) than him and it's a) difficult to formulate this without
> being impolite and b) it takes a lot of time. In fact, I know until
> now absolutely *no* company that will write you a personal letter
> explaining why you, in particular, were not chosen. I don't know
> whether in the US, corporations have that large HR departments that
> they can make this effort, but it doesn't strike me as SOP.

There are a lot of useful thing to be done for Wikimedia projects,
community, WMF, free knowledge... If there is a will to do so, it
should be used. If there is just one place for list admin, it is
reasonable to keep a list of other possible tasks and to offer one of
the tasks from the list to candidates which didn't pass.

Maybe it is time to think about canalizing enthusiasm of Wikimedians
toward higher involvement.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 5:38 PM, Sean Whitton <sean@silentflame.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 18:56, Anthony <wikimail@inbox.org> wrote:
> > Along these lines, does the mail software support giving someone
> permission
> > to approve messages only (not to change moderation status)? Seems that
> > pretty much anyone who can be trusted to send unmoderated posts can be
> > trusted to do this.
>
> I'd argue that posting from your own name is very different to judging
> the content of a message from someone already flagged (by being
> moderated) as potentially troublesome.
>

Of course it's very different. But as a matter of trusting someone, I stand
by my statement. Letting through posts by moderated users is "no big
deal". And remember, it's not just posts by people marked as potentially
troublesome - it's posts by people not marked as probably not troublesome.

But whether or not I'm right about that particular statement isn't even that
important. I think it's almost beyond debate that there are at least *some*
people who can be trusted to do this (at least on a trial basis), who are
willing to do this, and who don't currently have access to do this.

But does the mail software support this?

Anthony
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 5:50 PM, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com> wrote:

> Maybe it is time to think about canalizing enthusiasm of Wikimedians
> toward higher involvement.
>

Wasn't someone hired to do just that?
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Milos Rancic wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 6:49 PM, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2) However, what kind of mail would you have liked? You said that you
>> didn't want a boilerplate email, okay. But how do you write "personal
>> emails" to the ca. 10 applicants who we did not choose? Either you
>> keep it very short and simple ("Hi, this is to inform you that you
>> were considered but that we found Ral315 to be the most qualified
>> candidate after all"), which would be a form of a boilerplate again.
>> Otherwise, you'll have to outline for every candidate the exact
>> reasons why the successful candidate was "better" (read: more
>> qualified) than him and it's a) difficult to formulate this without
>> being impolite and b) it takes a lot of time. In fact, I know until
>> now absolutely *no* company that will write you a personal letter
>> explaining why you, in particular, were not chosen. I don't know
>> whether in the US, corporations have that large HR departments that
>> they can make this effort, but it doesn't strike me as SOP.
>
> There are a lot of useful thing to be done for Wikimedia projects,
> community, WMF, free knowledge... If there is a will to do so, it
> should be used. If there is just one place for list admin, it is
> reasonable to keep a list of other possible tasks and to offer one of
> the tasks from the list to candidates which didn't pass.
>
> Maybe it is time to think about canalizing enthusiasm of Wikimedians
> toward higher involvement.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


Yes! Absolutely and I agree! It was in this manner that I started
working with the others on the Wikimedia Blog. It all started with
"Well do you know of any volunteering I can do?" I don't remember who
(Raul or Cary?), but someone pointed me to ComProj, and I became active.

- --
Best,
Jon

[User:NonvocalScream]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkiorkcACgkQ6+ro8Pm1AtUWpwCbBii2615mH5KygmVYpGrWpc6w
w8UAmQFd/cdxXRE/EsMN6HfhJc7Pb7Og
=ZVl1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Anthony wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 5:50 PM, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Maybe it is time to think about canalizing enthusiasm of Wikimedians
>> toward higher involvement.
>>
>
> Wasn't someone hired to do just that?
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


And he does a good job at it. I think this above comment by Milos was
in reference to the specific instance of the volunteer list mod position.

- --
Best,
Jon

[User:NonvocalScream]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkiorn8ACgkQ6+ro8Pm1AtVLPQCdEHsIu67UV8rTeGfFphnpg27p
W74AnjRT4uW0ySCzaJU2L13DY0Idq2eX
=UeNp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Chad wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 12:51 AM, Ral315 <wiki.ral315@gmail.com> wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>> As far as my list inactivity goes, I read the list on a daily basis, but
>> lately I've noticed that others tend to make my points for me, and are much
>> more articulate in expressing their views. I think a lot of the "top
>> posters" add a significant amount to discussion and their posts are
>> worthwhile; for myself, I find that the more I post, the less I tend to say.
>>
>
> I wish more people had this insight. Personally, I think Ral315 will do an
> excellent job moderating the list.
>
> Honestly, it's an administrative job folks, it's not the keys to the kingdom.
>
> -Chad
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

I am more than sure, most assuredly sure that nobody here is in it (the
volunteer listmod) for power or status. I dislike that argument very
much. :) Some people just want to *do something*. ~~~~

- --
Best,
Jon

[User:NonvocalScream]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkiorrwACgkQ6+ro8Pm1AtXn7QCgu2dL/P/sdei04aoF1X2eLhwr
3G0An3qJqvsgHfLqeXFqhdAHh4znt5ue
=Cc4W
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Anthony wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 12:49 PM, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> 2) However, what kind of mail would you have liked? You said that you
>> didn't want a boilerplate email, okay. But how do you write "personal
>> emails" to the ca. 10 applicants who we did not choose? Either you
>> keep it very short and simple ("Hi, this is to inform you that you
>> were considered but that we found Ral315 to be the most qualified
>> candidate after all"), which would be a form of a boilerplate again.
>> Otherwise, you'll have to outline for every candidate the exact
>> reasons why the successful candidate was "better" (read: more
>> qualified) than him and it's a) difficult to formulate this without
>> being impolite and b) it takes a lot of time.
>
>
> An explanation of why only one person could be accepted would be helpful,
> since you seem to be implying that this is the case.
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

It could be just limiting the ability to a few is security minded. I'm
not sure. My volunteer offer stands should the list owner ever require
another.


I want to take a moment to Welcome Ral315, and Ral, thank you for
volunteering.

- --
Best,
Jon

[User:NonvocalScream]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkiorxwACgkQ6+ro8Pm1AtUnOACgiiF8is2Bybo50KLsa42IYnHn
keoAn2lBpRtIBthAjWi3xRByx1y8rHHK
=QVTg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

I agree with Chad. If I had any problems with Ral (I didn't, but
hypothetically if I did) this post by him would have eliminated them.

-Dan

Chad wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 12:51 AM, Ral315 <wiki.ral315@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> [snip]
>>
>> As far as my list inactivity goes, I read the list on a daily basis, but
>> lately I've noticed that others tend to make my points for me, and are much
>> more articulate in expressing their views. I think a lot of the "top
>> posters" add a significant amount to discussion and their posts are
>> worthwhile; for myself, I find that the more I post, the less I tend to say.
>>
>>
>
> I wish more people had this insight. Personally, I think Ral315 will do an
> excellent job moderating the list.
>
> Honestly, it's an administrative job folks, it's not the keys to the kingdom.
>
> -Chad
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 1:04 AM, Jon <scream@datascreamer.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Anthony wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 5:50 PM, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe it is time to think about canalizing enthusiasm of Wikimedians
>>> toward higher involvement.

AFAIK, Cary is not a list owner who asked for volunteers. As well as
he is not able to monitor all volunteer activities.

It is obvious that coordinating hundreds or thousands volunteers is
not a job for one person. Maybe it is good to think about Volunteer
Committee, led by Cary. (Hm. Do we have something like that?)

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Hoi,
Great idea we might call it a volunteer council :) Maybe this council can
liaise strongly with Cary in stead of making him the head honcho ...
Thanks,
GerardM

NB no irony intended !!

On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 9:56 AM, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 1:04 AM, Jon <scream@datascreamer.com> wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Anthony wrote:
> >> On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 5:50 PM, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Maybe it is time to think about canalizing enthusiasm of Wikimedians
> >>> toward higher involvement.
>
> AFAIK, Cary is not a list owner who asked for volunteers. As well as
> he is not able to monitor all volunteer activities.
>
> It is obvious that coordinating hundreds or thousands volunteers is
> not a job for one person. Maybe it is good to think about Volunteer
> Committee, led by Cary. (Hm. Do we have something like that?)
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

*wonders why this mailing list always edits Cary's job...* :p

On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 4:29 AM, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hoi,
> Great idea we might call it a volunteer council :) Maybe this council can
> liaise strongly with Cary in stead of making him the head honcho ...
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
> NB no irony intended !!
>
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 9:56 AM, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> AFAIK, Cary is not a list owner who asked for volunteers. As well as
>> he is not able to monitor all volunteer activities.
>>
>> It is obvious that coordinating hundreds or thousands volunteers is
>> not a job for one person. Maybe it is good to think about Volunteer
>> Committee, led by Cary. (Hm. Do we have something like that?)
>>

--
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023

---
Note: This e-mail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent to
this address will probably get lost.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:29 AM, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hoi,
> Great idea we might call it a volunteer council :) Maybe this council can
> liaise strongly with Cary in stead of making him the head honcho ...
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
> NB no irony intended !!

There are two different starting points between the Council and the
Committee intentions: Council was intended to represent (somehow)
community's (or communities') will, while committee is a working body
with a particular goal. With or without council, for me it is obvious
that we should have a body which manages volunteers' enthusiasm toward
higher involvement. (And, according to the size of the volunteer
community, this is not a job for one person.)

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Hoi,
When you start from either starting point, there is a need for credibility.
When activities are started with the clear intention to grow the activities
into a Community Council, you gain respect and credibility. Good intentions
are there aplenty. Many of the people who have shown interest to be actively
involved, are people that I respect for who they are and what they have
done. What I am looking for is that these few good men together are more
then their individual great reputations.
Thanks,
GerardM

On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 3:45 PM, Milos Rancic <millosh@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:29 AM, Gerard Meijssen
> <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hoi,
> > Great idea we might call it a volunteer council :) Maybe this council can
> > liaise strongly with Cary in stead of making him the head honcho ...
> > Thanks,
> > GerardM
> >
> > NB no irony intended !!
>
> There are two different starting points between the Council and the
> Committee intentions: Council was intended to represent (somehow)
> community's (or communities') will, while committee is a working body
> with a particular goal. With or without council, for me it is obvious
> that we should have a body which manages volunteers' enthusiasm toward
> higher involvement. (And, according to the size of the volunteer
> community, this is not a job for one person.)
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 3:08 PM, Casey Brown <cbrown1023.ml@gmail.com> wrote:
> *wonders why this mailing list always edits Cary's job...* :p

Sue (or the Board) did the right thing when they hired a person for
coordinating volunteers. Unlike for the majority of particular tasks,
I didn't saw any grass-root intention toward making such kind of body.
We like to talk about politics, policies, principles etc., but not a
lot about ordinary things, like -- how to function as a project,
community etc.; as well as it is almost impossible to find community
members who are ready to work on ordinary issues which are not visible
("ah, it is so boring..."). There are no a lot of people who like to
drive trains, buses, who like to move garbage from streets, to care
about playgrounds in the neighborhood... And there are a lot of
analogies between real life communal tasks and virtual space ones.

But, if there is someone who is already doing that, it is easy to say
"drive me to Venice" or "it would be really good if you would take
garbage from my house, so I wouldn't need to go out of my house".

And to be more serious: I realized now (after the issue with
candidates was raised) that the main reason why a lot of people are
willing to change description of Cary's job is -- that position is
very needed for the community and, as I said few times already, it is
not a size of job which one person may do. So, we need to think how to
solve that. And, "solving that" is much more community's job than
Cary's.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Milos Rancic wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:29 AM, Gerard Meijssen
> <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hoi,
>> Great idea we might call it a volunteer council :) Maybe this council can
>> liaise strongly with Cary in stead of making him the head honcho ...
>> Thanks,
>> GerardM
>>
>> NB no irony intended !!
>>
>
> There are two different starting points between the Council and the
> Committee intentions: Council was intended to represent (somehow)
> community's (or communities') will, while committee is a working body
> with a particular goal. With or without council, for me it is obvious
> that we should have a body which manages volunteers' enthusiasm toward
> higher involvement. (And, according to the size of the volunteer
> community, this is not a job for one person.)
>

It is not a job for a committee either.

I think a better way of looking at the matter would be to
approach it from the direction of how it looks to Cary;

Is there stuff he would be able to accomplish in his area
of responsibility if only there were more hours in a day?

Are there things that he personally could not be able to
accomplish even if there were 72 hours in a day, but some
other person with complementary skills _might_ be able
to accomplish?

Or is the situation as Cary sees it such that no matter
how much time or men you threw at it, pretty much the
same things would get accomplished, but merely with
a greater expenditure of people and time?

In short, better than a committee or "squad" or whatever,
would be to split the task into two or more complementary
areas of responsibility, *if* that is what Cary thinks would
be useful.


Yours,

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
> Milos Rancic wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:29 AM, Gerard Meijssen
>> <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hoi,
>>> Great idea we might call it a volunteer council :) Maybe this council can
>>> liaise strongly with Cary in stead of making him the head honcho ...
>>> Thanks,
>>> GerardM
>>>
>>> NB no irony intended !!
>>>
>> There are two different starting points between the Council and the
>> Committee intentions: Council was intended to represent (somehow)
>> community's (or communities') will, while committee is a working body
>> with a particular goal. With or without council, for me it is obvious
>> that we should have a body which manages volunteers' enthusiasm toward
>> higher involvement. (And, according to the size of the volunteer
>> community, this is not a job for one person.)
>>
>
> It is not a job for a committee either.
>
> I think a better way of looking at the matter would be to
> approach it from the direction of how it looks to Cary;
>
> Is there stuff he would be able to accomplish in his area
> of responsibility if only there were more hours in a day?
>
> Are there things that he personally could not be able to
> accomplish even if there were 72 hours in a day, but some
> other person with complementary skills _might_ be able
> to accomplish?
>
> Or is the situation as Cary sees it such that no matter
> how much time or men you threw at it, pretty much the
> same things would get accomplished, but merely with
> a greater expenditure of people and time?
>
> In short, better than a committee or "squad" or whatever,
> would be to split the task into two or more complementary
> areas of responsibility, *if* that is what Cary thinks would
> be useful.
>

My opinion?

I think Ral315 is an exceptional choice for list admin! That's what
this thread is about, isn't it?

- --
Cary Bass
Volunteer Coordinator

Your continued donations keep Wikipedia running! Support the Wikimedia
Foundation today: http://donate.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
Phone: 415.839.6885 x 601
Fax: 415.882.0495

E-Mail: cary@wikimedia.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkipweIACgkQyQg4JSymDYlCzgCcDzWe2BIwq/9hC8wJNfxObcav
0EEAoJPFX7ngPXZ3z43lz+C627avv1c/
=G2dD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Hoi,
When the WMF office needs to organise volunteers, they do so to fulfil the
needs that the WMF as an organisation has. This is not necessarily the same
thing as how the projects and their communities can make the work of our
volunteers more effective. Obviously there may be a lot of overlap between
what a council of volunteers organises and what Cary organises consequently
a high level of collaboration with the WMF is a sensible thing to do.

A council is to serve the needs of our communities, to coordinate our
efforts, to ensure that the lessons learned are incorporated in new efforts.
We should do this for our own reasons. Cary is capable enough to ensure that
the things HE needs to coordinate will get the attention he is able to give
and I am sure that a council will be happy to help as much as is feasible.
Thanks,
GerardM

On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 7:45 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro@gmail.com
> wrote:

> Milos Rancic wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:29 AM, Gerard Meijssen
> > <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hoi,
> >> Great idea we might call it a volunteer council :) Maybe this council
> can
> >> liaise strongly with Cary in stead of making him the head honcho ...
> >> Thanks,
> >> GerardM
> >>
> >> NB no irony intended !!
> >>
> >
> > There are two different starting points between the Council and the
> > Committee intentions: Council was intended to represent (somehow)
> > community's (or communities') will, while committee is a working body
> > with a particular goal. With or without council, for me it is obvious
> > that we should have a body which manages volunteers' enthusiasm toward
> > higher involvement. (And, according to the size of the volunteer
> > community, this is not a job for one person.)
> >
>
> It is not a job for a committee either.
>
> I think a better way of looking at the matter would be to
> approach it from the direction of how it looks to Cary;
>
> Is there stuff he would be able to accomplish in his area
> of responsibility if only there were more hours in a day?
>
> Are there things that he personally could not be able to
> accomplish even if there were 72 hours in a day, but some
> other person with complementary skills _might_ be able
> to accomplish?
>
> Or is the situation as Cary sees it such that no matter
> how much time or men you threw at it, pretty much the
> same things would get accomplished, but merely with
> a greater expenditure of people and time?
>
> In short, better than a committee or "squad" or whatever,
> would be to split the task into two or more complementary
> areas of responsibility, *if* that is what Cary thinks would
> be useful.
>
>
> Yours,
>
> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 20:45 +0300, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:

>
> In short, better than a committee or "squad" or whatever,
> would be to split the task into two or more complementary
> areas of responsibility, *if* that is what Cary thinks would
> be useful.

I'll put some words into Cary mouth for him. (Apology in advance Cary :)

His job is whatever as determined by the Board and his line manager (the
ED). And if he feels there's too much work for one person to do, he'll
let the ED / Board know.

;-)

KTC

--
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
- Heinrich Heine