Wiki Community/Board of Trustees/Talk

InfoInfo ArticleArticle

This page is for discussing the contents of Wiki Community/Board of Trustees.

Trustees speak for the community. They are responsible for the care of the content over time; not from an editing standpoint, but a data storage and management one. When other communities or admins interact with the community for major decisions, the trustees represent the community.

Potentially this might be the group to appoint Admins, but I'm not sure about that. I'm thinking that Davis Wiki needs a voice again to be able to communicate the needs of the community to both server hosts and software developers.


Who should not be:
Wiki Spot board members or ex-board members

My personal feeling (and I've mentioned elsewhere, but it likely fell through the cracks) is that a more organized core group for DavisWiki would be beneficial but that this proposal is probably too formal sounding. I'd suggest regular group meetings in person — maybe once a month — of contributors and then see if something progresses naturally from that. —PhilipNeustrom

I like the idea of something (incidentally, I'm honored to be included). I don't have any particular opinion on formal vs. informal at the moment, but I think there's merit to the notion that there hasn't been a lot of communication between the Davis part of Davis Wiki and, well, the Wiki part of it. If that can be addressed through having a periodic meeting of everyone interested to talk things over, great. If it needs something a bit more formal, that's fine, too. Mostly, I'd like to see what people think of an idea along these general lines—whether something is necessary, what that something is, and how to go about doing it. —TomGarberson

I agree with this but there are non-Davis people besides myself that post. Because the Wiki is not limited to only Davis residents, I would request that one non-Davis resident be brought on board just to offer a separate view. While that person may not make meetings, input could be given by email or on a page here. I'm not even suggesting it be myself, but I think it's a good idea. —PeteB

I am also honored to be mentioned as a possible nominee and interested in the idea, but I think I need more information about what the scope and purpose of the group is. Perhaps some examples of past issues where such a group would have been beneficial and potential future issues would help me see what the proposal is getting at. —CovertProfessor

Just playing devils advocate here... This sort of sounds like it is to be a closed group. Who's selecting the BOT? I know part of the intent was not to be exclusive, but would a volunteer format would be more inclusive? Could the same effect be met by planning more wikibbqs? Open wikibbq's? Just want to throw this out there. JeffTolentino

Having "members" and such bugs me. Anyone who has free time and the inclination should be able to get involved without being elected and such. Wiki folk getting together IRL to discuss wiki issues and form consensus sounds just fine without elections. —WilliamLewis

After some offline discussions, I've come to realize that there is no longer anyone from Davis who represents the interests of the Davis Wiki itself (something I hadn't really realized before), and I think it's important that the Davis community has a board to represent the wiki that it has worked so hard to build. So, I am in favor of creating a Board of Trustees. I think it needs to be reasonably formal so that it can be the official voice of the Davis community's wiki, yet flexible enough so that new trustees can be added without too much fanfare. —CovertProfessor

If ever this hypothetical group is limited to editors who meet certain criteria, I think a name change is in order. Maybe something like "Software Improvement and Communications Group"?

Ok, that is a bit more clear. I agree with scott, the "Board of Trustees" is an overly formal term. Regular meetups sound like a good idea though. Could this just be open to everyone? —JT

It occurs to me that the creation of this page has resulted in Davis Wiki getting more attention from localwiki representatives than we've seen in a while. —JasonAller

Hi Daubert

I agree with all of the foregoing and am happy to help in any way I can. —DonShor

Proposal II

In the spirit of the original proposal, let us form a group, tentatively named "Davis Wiki Interest Group" (DWIG), composed of all who are willing to serve, with the particular goal of representing the Davis community's interest in the Davis Wiki. Let us meet once per month.

Below, please discuss whether we ought to meet face-to-face or virtually (e.g., on the DavisWiki irc channel), the former being better for obvious reasons, the latter allowing participation by those who want to remain anonymous and/or want to participate from afar.

Discuss, or, if you're so inclined, vote "yay" or "nay".

Incidentally, [WWW]this is the kind of area where I'm hoping people can get together and discuss Davis's interests. I understand it's basically just a list of some ideas, not a feature that's already being coded or anything. It's the sort of area where having some sort of voice representing Davis's interests would be useful as the process continues, be that voice formal or informal. The problem with avoiding anything formal is exactly what we've seen over the past three weeks: nothing actually happens. No one's responsible for anything, so it all stays abstract. —TomGarberson

This is a Wiki Spot wiki. Wiki Spot is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization that helps communities collaborate via wikis.