Mailing List Archive

Hello Effe,

I think this is a good suggestion. I will put it on the next meeting at
the second weekend of the new year.

Ting

effe iets anders wrote:
> >From Sue's report, I understood that the current practice is to have board
> minutes approved only on the next board meeting. In practice that means a
> delay of several months. In a quickly changing world as ours, that is quite
> a long time span.
>
> Would it be possible to decrease this time span somehow, and approve the
> minutes on an earlier moment? In that way, the volunteers can be kept more
> up to date, the board would work more transparently and better ways to
> interact and react on decisions made. Because if minutes are published
> months afterwards, the motivation to read them and react on it is obviously
> much lower then when they actually still have a direct meaning and are more
> or less recent. Besides that, if the community has imput on the decisions
> made, they could give it, and it could be discussed in that next board
> meeting, and not only the one after that (delay 6 months).
>
> I sincerely hope the board will find a way to publish the minutes within,
> say, two weeks to a month :)
>
> Best regards,
>
> Lodewijk
> _______________________________________________
> 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 Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:49 AM, effe iets anders
<effeietsanders@gmail.com>wrote:

> From Sue's report, I understood that the current practice is to have board
> minutes approved only on the next board meeting. In practice that means a
> delay of several months. In a quickly changing world as ours, that is quite
> a long time span.
>

That's a fairly standard practice. How would you approve the minutes
without holding a meeting? (Sure, you could do it using a unanimous consent
resolution, but that's certainly not typical.)

Would it be possible to decrease this time span somehow, and approve the
> minutes on an earlier moment? In that way, the volunteers can be kept more
> up to date, the board would work more transparently and better ways to
> interact and react on decisions made. Because if minutes are published
> months afterwards, the motivation to read them and react on it is obviously
> much lower then when they actually still have a direct meaning and are more
> or less recent. Besides that, if the community has imput on the decisions
> made, they could give it, and it could be discussed in that next board
> meeting, and not only the one after that (delay 6 months).
>
> I sincerely hope the board will find a way to publish the minutes within,
> say, two weeks to a month :)


Publishing a draft of the minutes (or an informal summary of the meeting)
would be one thing. Approving the official minutes is quite another.

Are the meetings considered confidential? If not, there's nothing stopping
any board member from providing a summary at any time. If so, well, then
why publish the minutes in the first place?
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

2008/12/14 Anthony <wikimail@inbox.org>:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:49 AM, effe iets anders
> <effeietsanders@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> From Sue's report, I understood that the current practice is to have board
>> minutes approved only on the next board meeting. In practice that means a
>> delay of several months. In a quickly changing world as ours, that is quite
>> a long time span.
>>
>
> That's a fairly standard practice. How would you approve the minutes
> without holding a meeting? (Sure, you could do it using a unanimous consent
> resolution, but that's certainly not typical.)

It's also not typical to have a large group of very committed and
interested volunteers wanting to know what's going on. Approving the
minutes by email would seem perfectly practical to me.

> Publishing a draft of the minutes (or an informal summary of the meeting)
> would be one thing. Approving the official minutes is quite another.
>
> Are the meetings considered confidential? If not, there's nothing stopping
> any board member from providing a summary at any time. If so, well, then
> why publish the minutes in the first place?

It may not be wise to publish unapproved minutes - if there are
mistakes, the consequences could be rather unfortunate.

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

On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com>wrote:

> 2008/12/14 Anthony <wikimail@inbox.org>:
> > On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:49 AM, effe iets anders
> > <effeietsanders@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> From Sue's report, I understood that the current practice is to have
> board
> >> minutes approved only on the next board meeting. In practice that means
> a
> >> delay of several months. In a quickly changing world as ours, that is
> quite
> >> a long time span.
> >>
> >
> > That's a fairly standard practice. How would you approve the minutes
> > without holding a meeting? (Sure, you could do it using a unanimous
> consent
> > resolution, but that's certainly not typical.)
>
> It's also not typical to have a large group of very committed and
> interested volunteers wanting to know what's going on.


Maybe not typical, but it's fairly common. Of course, organizations with
volunteers that are very committed and interested are usually membership
organizations, and members are invited to the meetings.

Approving the
> minutes by email would seem perfectly practical to me.



> > Publishing a draft of the minutes (or an informal summary of the meeting)
> > would be one thing. Approving the official minutes is quite another.
> >
> > Are the meetings considered confidential? If not, there's nothing
> stopping
> > any board member from providing a summary at any time. If so, well, then
> > why publish the minutes in the first place?
>
> It may not be wise to publish unapproved minutes - if there are
> mistakes, the consequences could be rather unfortunate.


Yeah, an informal summary would be better. Or just record the whole thing
(minus any "closed session" portions) and put it on the Internet.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

The chair of the board, Michael, had posted the topics before the
meeting and a short report about resolutions and issues discussed after
the meeting.

Ting

Anthony wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:49 AM, effe iets anders
> <effeietsanders@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>> From Sue's report, I understood that the current practice is to have board
>> minutes approved only on the next board meeting. In practice that means a
>> delay of several months. In a quickly changing world as ours, that is quite
>> a long time span.
>>
>>
>
> That's a fairly standard practice. How would you approve the minutes
> without holding a meeting? (Sure, you could do it using a unanimous consent
> resolution, but that's certainly not typical.)
>
> Would it be possible to decrease this time span somehow, and approve the
>
>> minutes on an earlier moment? In that way, the volunteers can be kept more
>> up to date, the board would work more transparently and better ways to
>> interact and react on decisions made. Because if minutes are published
>> months afterwards, the motivation to read them and react on it is obviously
>> much lower then when they actually still have a direct meaning and are more
>> or less recent. Besides that, if the community has imput on the decisions
>> made, they could give it, and it could be discussed in that next board
>> meeting, and not only the one after that (delay 6 months).
>>
>> I sincerely hope the board will find a way to publish the minutes within,
>> say, two weeks to a month :)
>>
>
>
> Publishing a draft of the minutes (or an informal summary of the meeting)
> would be one thing. Approving the official minutes is quite another.
>
> Are the meetings considered confidential? If not, there's nothing stopping
> any board member from providing a summary at any time. If so, well, then
> why publish the minutes in the first place?
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Hi all,

Yes, I know that in large organizations it is uncommon to approve minutes by
email. I however see no fundamental obstacles myself, but I'd love to hear
from them if they are there. Please note that "commonness" is no argument to
me in this case. I understand how we got to the current situation, but that
is not what I want to discuss. I'd like to discuss a change in that
situation :)

It is about minutes, not about opinions. The only thing that should be
judged while publishing is 1) whether they reflect the truth and 2) whether
there is anything in there that should remain non-disclosed. Both can in
principle perfectly be considered by email imho.

A summary is something, but personally I prefer the real resolutions and
minutes :) In general they are not too extensive anyway in this
organization.

And, as Thomas pointed out, this *is* an unusual organization. Not only are
there many volunteers, but there are also a lot of chapters who are
dependent in some way of these resolutions. These can influence their
functioning quite a lot, and only recieve the minutes together with the
general public. But of course, again, if there are heavy arguments not to do
this, I'd love to hear of them :)

Thank you Ting, for taking it to the board. I hope that in the future, the
community and chapters can more actively participate in the movement :)

Best regards,

Lodewijk

2008/12/14 Ting Chen <wing.philopp@gmx.de>

> The chair of the board, Michael, had posted the topics before the
> meeting and a short report about resolutions and issues discussed after
> the meeting.
>
> Ting
>
> Anthony wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:49 AM, effe iets anders
> > <effeietsanders@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >
> >> From Sue's report, I understood that the current practice is to have
> board
> >> minutes approved only on the next board meeting. In practice that means
> a
> >> delay of several months. In a quickly changing world as ours, that is
> quite
> >> a long time span.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > That's a fairly standard practice. How would you approve the minutes
> > without holding a meeting? (Sure, you could do it using a unanimous
> consent
> > resolution, but that's certainly not typical.)
> >
> > Would it be possible to decrease this time span somehow, and approve the
> >
> >> minutes on an earlier moment? In that way, the volunteers can be kept
> more
> >> up to date, the board would work more transparently and better ways to
> >> interact and react on decisions made. Because if minutes are published
> >> months afterwards, the motivation to read them and react on it is
> obviously
> >> much lower then when they actually still have a direct meaning and are
> more
> >> or less recent. Besides that, if the community has imput on the
> decisions
> >> made, they could give it, and it could be discussed in that next board
> >> meeting, and not only the one after that (delay 6 months).
> >>
> >> I sincerely hope the board will find a way to publish the minutes
> within,
> >> say, two weeks to a month :)
> >>
> >
> >
> > Publishing a draft of the minutes (or an informal summary of the meeting)
> > would be one thing. Approving the official minutes is quite another.
> >
> > Are the meetings considered confidential? If not, there's nothing
> stopping
> > any board member from providing a summary at any time. If so, well, then
> > why publish the minutes in the first place?
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l