[theforum] our wiki
Erika
ekm at seastorm.com
Wed Nov 26 13:37:26 CST 2008
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
More information about the theforum
mailing list