Forum:Organizational structure: Difference between revisions

:<s>{{support}}</s> [[User:John|John]] ([[User talk:John|talk]]) 18:46, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

::After the reviewing it again, I am going to {{oppose}} for now. The council including the project leaders in my opinion causes a conflict or as some would put it, in situations, allow gaming of the whole system to a certain persons wants. A few responsibilities of the council will be 'reviewing the Project Leaders' work' and 'settling major disputes between members'. To me, this is fine however when the project leaders = partial council, it is an issue in my opinion. Project leaders should in no way be response for reviewing their own work and pointing out their own flaws, a third party uninvolved group (hence the council) should be doing it to ensure all concerns are addressed. Also major disputes should only be sent to the council if project leaders have exhausted all their avenues. Therefore having them deal with the issue again is unneeded and may add stress onto a particular person. Also 'decisions of the Community Council may be overridden by the Project Leaders' brings a conflict of interest to say if a particular decision is 3-2, all the council say no (3) but the two leaders say yes (2) it is effectively opening it up to the decision passing because the leaders decide to user their 'override' power. Ultimately, the council should be a third party with no project leaders involved in the actual council itself. [[User:John|John]] ([[User talk:John|talk]]) 21:07, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

:{{support}} Pro monarchy. [[User:Eikes|eikes]] ([[User talk:Eikes|talk]]) 18:56, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

:{{support}} <s>{{neutral}}</s> Out of the Community Council, I gather that [[User:addshore|addshore]], [[User:Dusti|Dusti]], [[User:John|John]] and [[User:Kudu|Kudu]] were the original co-founders of Orain, and according to [[irc:7082878|this comment on IRC]], [[User:Joe G|Joe G]] ''"could have been a co-founder if he hadn't been away"''. Are there going to be any regular members (as in, non-founders) of the community appointed to the Community Council? Otherwise I have a bit of a problem with the term "Community Council", sorry. It could be interpreted as "a council of community members", or as it currently appears to be "a council that oversees the community". This latter definition could be misleading for those who take the former as their understanding of what a "Community Council" is all about. Why not just call a spade a spade, and go with a "Founders Council" or something. Either that or appoint regular members of the community to the "Community Council", even just for a set term. I'm not angling for a place on the council myself, I wouldn't volunteer if such a position were offered. I note that Kudu said above that the number of council members would grow as the site grows. Perhaps something along those lines could be added? <span title="Meta-Wiki profile" class="plainlinks">[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:AugurNZ <font color="#000" face="Times">'''''Augur'''''</font><font color="#33f" family="Arial">'''''NZ'''''</font>]</span> <span title="Meta-Wiki talk" class="plainlinks">[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:AugurNZ <font color="#000" size="4">&#x2710;</font>]</span>[[Special:Contributions/AugurNZ|<font size="4" color="#000">&#x2315;</font>]] 20:32, 26 October 2013 (UTC)