Agenda & Notes for Governance WG Meeting #7 - Mon 5 Oct at 14:00 UTC

Community Governance GOSH Governance Working Group
1

Hi All

Here is a draft agenda for tomorrow’s meeting, check out the post below for more details!

http://forum.openhardware.science/t/gosh-governance-domains-input-needed/2549/2

  1. Introduction to new plan for meetings and facilitation [Gunner/Jenny]
  2. Temperature check for how people are feeling about the list of domains of governance, confirm if this is sufficient to proceed for now.
  3. Discussion on groups that need to be seated, how to select them, values that need to be considered for each group
  4. Work for this group in advance of the next meeting in two weeks
  5. Decision on meeting timing following poll

Speak to you all soon!

1 Like
2

Hi All

In case you haven’t already seen them, here are the notes from last week’s meeting. Thanks so much to Julieta for making these!

The next meeting is Mon 19 Oct, at the same time for now while gunner is checking his availability against the dudle results.

Topics for next meeting:

  • How do we envision structure of mgmt group
  • How do we get that group in place
  • Possible scenarios of how this representation can be made
  • How to engage broad GOSH community (call) (after first version of it)

The optional working session is still schedules for Mon 12 Oct at 14:00 UTC is anyone wants to hang out on Jitsi and think through these topics in advance, I’m afraid I have a clash at that time so sending my apologies.

Jenny

Notes

People in the call

  • Gunner
  • Jenny
  • Marina
  • Gayatri
  • Ji Li
  • Thomas
  • Julieta
  1. Spreadsheet

Jenny:

  • Explains each three tabs that demand input from group
    • tab 1 has domains of gov
    • tab 2 empowered groups
    • tab 3 more GOSH specific, ways in which people can get more decision power in relation to contributions

Marina: too much detail to talk about but we need to go through in general and make a decision

Gunner: +1 to groupings but related to tab 1, calling “Management” a category isn’t great (hierarchies, power dynamics, etc but also all groups demand management)

Gunner: WG has to scope work and communicate what is doing, e.g. management group, make recommendations but leave implementation to groups - fresh eyes on topics

Gayatri +1 to spreadsheet, makes clear gov groups that can be formed, should make recommendations not only for mgmt group but for others too, they give a kickstart

Agreements

  • spreadsheet is good set of recommendations but we need to: formalize scope of groups, process by which people are part of groups, recommendations for these groups
  • expectations of members of mgmt group

Gu: how many people in mgmt group? keep it small

Chat: 3, 5, 7 . . .

Marina: people in the mgmt group “represent” regional groups or not?

Gayatri: should be ppl committed to community and values, most active and have most connections/interactions, responsibilities, more participatory if ppl represent a larger group, people who have better relationships with local groups will be able to promote greater participation and representation of local communities

Marina: group should be integrated by ppl nominated by geographical region, so they can make decision related to their groups

Thomas: +1 Marina, Gayatri, make perspectives from regionals visible in the global

Julieta: +1 to nominees

Marina: not all equity goals may be matched with representing structure

Gunner: not marry to one model, geographic representation matters, but e.g. does it map to amount of work being done? how to make elections happen? some regions may do it, others not? think about it next call

Next:

  • How do we envision structure of mgmt group
  • How do we get that group in place
  • Possible scenarios of how this representation can be made
  • How to engage broad GOSH community (call) (after first version of it)
1 Like
3

I won’t be able to join today, I’m sorry this is a really heavy month for me. Leaving some ideas here.

  • How do we envision structure of mgmt group
    What about something like a self-appointed board. I understand the limitations of regional representative seats but I think lazy consensus + veto can help overcome that. If a region is more active than other, and demands more importance in decision-making, it’s not very aligned with our values, I’d say. It is aligned with our values that even less powerful actors should be able to have an effective voice, though.

Why self-appointed, just to make it simpler and ensure the ones who end up there are the ones who will commit time.

  • How do we get that group in place
    I see there is already a criteria defined for WG members in the spreadsheet, we can review that and make an open call for nominees.

  • Possible scenarios of how this representation can be made
    1 per region, keep group as small as possible

  • How to engage broad GOSH community (call) (after first version of it)
    We should have an open call to discuss the model. First call for nominees should be open to all, IMHO.

1 Like