[foundation-board] an interesting potential coordinator

Fri Sep 3 08:27:14 UTC 2010

On 3 September 2010 07:41, paula le dieu <paula at ledieu.org> wrote:
> I am putting a placeholder note here to assure Jo that I am following this
> discussion as of this morning. I will marshall my thoughts today and
> respond.

Ditto. Sorry I haven't come back to this thread for a while, I have
been thinking about it and have more to add, but I've been distracted
this week.

Becky

> Paula
>
> On 3 Sep 2010 01:55, "Jo Walsh" <metazool at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 31/08/2010 14:34, Jonathan Gray wrote:
>>
>> I would also be keen to distinguish between core manag...
>
> Jonny, I absolutely disagree here. I think the difference between funded and
> unfunded projects is synthetic and is not organisationally helpful. CKAN
> began as a volunteer project and was for a long time.
> *All* OKF projects deserve funding.
>
> Please, all of you, get over this "reporting". It is just writing
> documentation, working in public as much as possible. This is standard
> practise for JISC projects, this is not unreasonable to expect.
> Collecting documentation together, having simple standards, that help new
> people coming to projects understand and engage.
>
> I don't understand what you mean by devolution of responsibility. Project
> owners already have autonomy. All i am talking about here is minimal
> documentation. Even volunteer projects will benefit from proper public
> documentation about exactly who is working on a project, exactly what the
> goals are, what the common ground is with other projects.
>
> Only a project leader / project manager can really produce this. A few HOURS
> of work per project for a very large one, if that, to get this done enough
> and produce an overview from. (using Yahoo! Pipes or whatever).
>
> I know it is late at night but I feel like i am typing into a black hole
> here. Martin, Jordan, Paula, Rufus - do you agree with Ian and Becky that
> OKF needs an Executive Director to report to the Board and manage
> paid/partner projects? Or do you see my point here, that this move is not in
> the spirit of where OKF started, appears to be addressing the problem at the
> wrong level, and is likely to have a negative impact on the rest of the
> community?
>
> I also feel like you're putting cart before horse. Let's hire an ED. Okay,
> let's figure out what they are going to do.
> Look at this task list: http://wiki.okfn.org/coord/tasks
>
> Apart from the sysadmin stuff, your ED could be responsible for most of
> this. Rufus and Jonny are *already* both dropping a lot of stuff on the
> floor trying to cover this task list. Let's look at it and think about
> collective organisational priorities and task dependencies, what the most
> benefit is in hiring someone to do, in time they free up for others, and at
> points where we are letting the community down (such as not responding to
> issues raised in the tracker, flaky infrastructure, poor project
> documentation not encouraging participation, etc)
>
> Please excuse my last mail - travelling and thinking too much, had no right
> to start fucking at you all. This speaks of my frustration but also my
> sincerity about this, i am not deliberately being divisive.
>
>
> jo
> --
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-board mailing list
> foundation-board at ...
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-board mailing list
> foundation-board at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
>
>