[okfn-discuss] Governance and structure of the Open Knowledge Foundation and its activities

[Ed Pastore]

If you would be interested in taking the open philosophy to this  
aspect of the organization, you may wish to consider enabling aspects  
of open governance / collaborative governance.

In other words: why restrict decision-making to a small group of  
people? In a group which promotes openness, the governance structure  
need not be an exception.

The member projects of the Metagovernment project are each building  
different software structures which can act as tools for governance,  
ranging from helping in the decision-making process (such as  
Vilfredo), to allowing outside input into policymakers' decisions  
(such as DemocracyLab), to allowing for cascading representation (such  
as Votorola), to opening up all decisions to the entire community  
(such as most of the other projects in the Metagovernment project):
http://metagovernment.org/wiki/Active_projects

Small/new non-profits are one of our core target audiences at the  
moment, as we figure they are a much better testing ground than, say,  
major national governments. But the end-goal is to allow much, much  
broader participation by everyone in any decision they wish to be  
involved in.

If you would like to consider adopting one of our platforms, I would  
recommend joining our list server and asking which would be most  
appropriate for your needs.
http://metagovernment.org/mailman/listinfo/start_metagovernment.org

Thanks for your consideration,

Ed Pastore
http://metagovernment.org/wiki/User:Ed_Pastore


P.S. Link in below e-mail was malformed. Should be:
http://www.okfn.org/governance/



On Nov 18, 2009, at 11:13 AM, Rufus Pollock wrote:

> I know many people find goverance/structure stuff a bit dull but
> please don't be put off -- this is important stuff if you're
> interested in the OKF and its activities!
>
> The OKF has had a governance document from the inception:
> <http://www.okfn.org/goverance/>
>
> However, due to our small size much of what has been in there has been
> implemented informally rather than formally. It is now time be a bit
> more formal in how we organize the community. Not only is this
> important in itself but it should also provide greater clarity as to
> what is going on, who is involved etc.
>
> The proposed setup is as follows:
>
> 1. There are "Network Members" of the OKF. Anyone may become a network
> member but membership must be approved by the Projects Committee (see
> next item). In general, Network Members are expected to be actively
> involved in one or more projects or working groups.
>
> 2. There is a Projects Committee which is elected by Network Members
> from among the Network Members on an annual basis. It deals with all
> project and working group related matters including incubating,
> approving, retiring project and working groups, monitoring their
> progress, etc.
>
> 3. The Project Committee has regular monthly meetings via irc, e.g. on
> the second Tuesday of every month.
>
> 4. To bootstrap this process the Board will appoint an initial set of
> Network Members and a Projects Committee. All current working group
> and project members will be automatically be invited to become network
> members.
>
> What do people think? What is good/bad, in need of amendment or  
> clarification?
>
> Regards,
>
> Rufus Pollock
>
> ## Background to this
>
> Discussion over the summer indicated that clearer structure and
> governance is needed, see:
>
> <http://wiki.okfn.org/Vision/Structure>
>
> plus last email on this subject:
> http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-discuss/2009-October/001675.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> okfn-discuss mailing list
> okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss