[Theforum] Framing the House?

[Ron Dorman]

rudy wrote:

> >Whatcha think?
>
> i think it's a great start, and thanks for jumping in
>
> one of the things that peeves me -- i'll make no bones about it, and take
> my lumps -- is the way people (not you specifically, ron, people in
> general) focus on the "how" of getting something done, rather than the
> "what" of what should be done\

yep

> let me briefly come back to your post, ron --
>
> >  ** technical committee ...
>
> from your description, this is in place already, it's thesite
> (the people on thesite discussion list)

yep

> > ** correspondence committee ...
>
> again from your description, this is place already, it's the admin group

yep

> in the past, the admin group has handled two functions, the day-to-day
> running of evolt, as well as setting strategic direction
>
> this latter function is now shifting here, to theforum, but ultimately,
> assuming we reach nfp status, will be assumed by the board of directors

yep

> > ** fundraising/finance ...
>
> board of directors, again, assuming we agree to go nfp

yep

> now, at this point, i recognize there is a strong temptation to start
> asking questions like "how should we get there?" and "how do we elect board
> members?" and "how should the board get input from the general membership?"
> and so on

yep

> notice anything?
>
> we should probably focus on "what" for a while, at least till we get
> rolling

bingo

> i suspect that it will be a short discussion, because i think we're all
> going to pretty much agree on a few things, e.g.
>
>   1. thelist, and the people on it, as well as the various evolt
>          sites (*.e.o) are the "sine qua non" assets of evolt
>
>   2. the founding principles of evolt are "by web developers, for web
>         developers" and "giving something back"
>
>   3. the assets of evolt need to be protected, nurtured, enhanced
>
>   4. not-for-profit incorporation achieves many objectives for 3.
>
> these are just off the top of my head, and i'm sure y'all can come up with
> lots more

yep

> while i was writing this, ron made an excellent suggestion --
>
>     a) Publish existing evolt vision and mission statement.
>     b) Get feedback from all evolt on vision.
>     c) Publish final evolt vision and mission statement
>     d) Define system/s needed to support vision and mission statement
>     e) Let groups assemble to develop needed system/s  (this allows
>            all evolt members to contribute in their area of
>            expertise/interest)
>
> my only comment on the above is that d) and e) are really about "how" and
> that's where all the controversy seems to be

this seems to be true.  my thoughts were:
1) most of the things we need to keep the community healthy are in place and
functioning.  leave them alone for now
2) slow down, take a deep breath and think about and discuss what we need to
do to keep the community healthy, and growing in the future.

> anybody want to go ahead with a) through c) ?

I would like to, but we have better writers in our community than I.  rudy, you
made a clean, clear and concise statement in your post.  There is some good
stuff in Mishka's FAQ article.

Would one or several of our good writers take these things and draft a mission
statement, motto and whatever else can be used to set a foundation and anchor
for publishing?

Ron D.