Talk:Movement Strategy/Updates/June 15, 2021

What composition should the committee have in terms of movement roles, gender, regions, affiliations and other diversity factors?

For question 1 - the answer is in Movement_Charter/Drafting_committee_set-up_options#Diversity_&_Expertise_matrix, as discussed in the June 12-13 weekend. Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 21:09, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

What is the best process to select the committee members to form a competent and diverse team?

The committee will consist of people from WMF (both board members and staff), people from affiliates, and volunteer contributors to online content project wikis (aka editors). The WMF will appoint the WMF people, affiliates are expected to select their representatives based on a method determined by the affiliates, and the "community" members could be either elected or appointed. Quite some community members prefer elections. Quite some people belief appointments might expedite the process. However, we are going around in circles around this question for six months now. In case we settle on appointments of the community members, who will appoint them? Community sourced board members is one answer to that question. I belief quite some people prefer elections over appointment by WMF staff. Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 21:20, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

How much dedication is it reasonable to expect from committee members, in terms of hours per week and months of work? Should the initial members commit for the whole duration of the project or should renewals be expected?

This will require 5 hours a week for six to twelve months. Preferably they commit for the period until Wikimania 2022. Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 21:20, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

A small committee can be good for wordsmithing and refining, but does not seem like a good way to draft the outline, extent, and implications of a charter -- especially when we are expecting the broader community to ratify the result. An open + iterative process that continuously captures and responds to feedback, or makes it easy for anyone to fork + modify part of the draft to clearly express their own take, seems faster, better, less brittle. –SJ talk  20:26, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Expression of interest

Please do post your Expression of interest on a subpage of Movement Charter/Movement Charter Drafting Group/Expression of interest. Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 12:30, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Focus on content + purpose!

I don't understand all of the focus on process and committee structure, before we have more raw material to work with -- organized categories of goals, ideas, and needs waiting to be catalyzed into a concise, shared document and a working council.

The heart of the charter + council seems to be defining our shared principles, taking on work that doesn't currently have a way to get done, and answering questions that currently have no mechanism to answer. So what are these?

Once we have that, of course we need a drafting/review/approval process for a consensus document. And some iterative way to improve, amend, refine over time. But first we could use templates + models of successful models to emulate, proposed sections and specific topics to include, and a growing list of the ways in which we've been building [charter/council] concepts into other governance flows.

I am much more concerned to see questions like these answered:

1. What are examples of good, similar charters?
   • Community charters (defining principles and collaboration)
   • International NGO: families of documents (sometimes: just defining how the global governing body works)
2. What work do we expect the charter, and the Council, to carry?
   • What other elements of the current strategy + implementations refer to + rely on them to exist?
   • What aspects of the charter, or of the council, are already described elsewhere [w/o implementation details]
3. What parallel documents + principles + topic-summaries are being compiled?

–SJ talk  20:26, 22 June 2021 (UTC)