[theforum] our wiki

[Erika]

Simon MacDonald wrote:
> 1- Is the organisation stuff still relevant?

we don't have elections afik and the whole marketing/steering/desdev etc 
substructure stuff seems to have fallen by the wayside.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<history>
Here is my historical POV:

For a while we had a very active/noisy admin community, and we were 
seeking a process, some balance between action and control, and a way to 
have democracy with direction.  Committees and such were an effort in 
that direction.

The result ended up being (a lot of us feel) that our focus then became 
all about process, how to make all this structure work, how to vote etc 
etc ... instead of focusing on the meat and potatoes of the org.  People 
got impatient, frustrated, confused.  Squabbles broke out.

I don't think we ever "formally" decided anything about dismantling the 
structure that is on there.... (I think I wandered off away from admin 
in the middle of this...) but I do think we'll mostly all agree that 
that more granularized degree of process and formalization didn't work 
for us.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~</ history>

The result is our current anarchistic/informal consensus style, with a 
few important structural elements:

1. I am thinking sysadmin has a pretty good team worked out between 
themselves, since they've kept us running so well for so long. I have no 
idea how they work.

2. We have a treasurer still (David Kaufman, formerly Marlene Bruce)

other than that... I'm not sure.  I think that our FORMAL org is 
minimal, and that we instead rely on community (#evolt, and mutual 
projects) oral tradition, and an open-source approach to process.

I wouldn't mind seeing more activity, if not structure, in the editorial 
(content) group.

So like all the ghosts of evolt past: the org stuff is, and is not 
relevant.  Is it current?  HELL NO.

I personally would like to find a way to keep records of things we have 
tried, (such as the different subcommittees, elected offices etc), 
because although things that have not worked in the past may work in the 
future, it's useful to remember what did and didn't work, and why.

So perhaps we could have a little "evolt.org history" section in our wiki?


> 2- would you hold project docs on a wiki or use teamworkpm or point from
> teamworkpm to a wiki for document detail?

teamwork was IMO just for this big redesign push project management.  If 
we have other large "projects" in the future I think we should just make 
the choice about how to organize/manage them at that time.

I think the wiki should be, at this point, for big-picture docs.

Though the only reason I didn't choose to use the wiki instead of 
teamwork for project management is someone involved said they "didn't 
like" wikis, and I'm not very experienced with them.

So I just took a suggested direction, and that was teamworkpm.  There 
may be some stuff from teamworkpm that should go onto the wiki.  For 
example, I think our logo stuff, etc, should be stored in a permanent 
location, preferably (IMO) on evolt.org servers.

>  So
> anything we do should be pretty simple in terms of structure and
> functionality - KISS

Yep, cause KISS is pretty much how evolt.org works.

Erika