[Theforum] Re: what's this list for? (was: Charter Gaps)

[Warden, Matt]

rudy wrote:
>my understanding of what this list is for is to get consensus from the
>general evolt membership 
[...]
>i don't think a critique of the way the board is currently structured or
>the wording of the bylaws is where we should start off

You mean get concensus on what we already have? That wasn't my
understanding at all.

adrian:
"we could, of course, create a new, public list and get everyone's
feedback, instead of just trotting out the final product for approval"

IOW, we use this list as a discussion of what we should do rather than an
approval of what we've already done (of course, if they're the same
thing...).

So, taking a step back might not be productive, but I think it's a good
idea. IMO, the members should have been involved in this since the
beginning. But, also IMO, I don't think we can expect top-notch results
when we refuse to let non-admins get a peek at "that side" of evolt (by
opening up the admin archives or allowing them to handle article editing
and approval/denial, etc.). Like I said to Michele, it'd be like you
handing me a pen&paper the first day I came on to admin and saying "draft
evolt's future". Without letting people get a feel for how shit works
currently, I don't think you can expect that what comes out of here 

a. will be an easy transition, or
b. will come from non-admins

IOW, either non-admins will sit back because admins keep saying "that's
not how we do things" and it will really be a product of admins, or, if
the non-admins do put a lot of work into this (and I hope that happens),
then chances are that it will be quite a departure from how things work
ATM. And I fear that may result in a lack of (forgive me) "buy-in".


So, since there seems to be quite a bit of confusion about what exactly
this list is for and what its objectives are, maybe adrian should clear
that up (because I probably don't have the full picture either).


thanks,


--
mattwarden
mattwarden.com