Governance Working Group formation

Hello folks,

The Guide elections have come and went, and thankfully there were no applicants. I am hereby proposing we discuss and form a Governance working group to replace some of the responsibilities of the Guide role that's being phased out, while providing a clear direction forward.

As per Doc 006, a working group can arise if the community can be interpreted to respond positively in this topic. This topic is here to have people respond positively or negatively to this idea, discuss what it should or shouldn't be, and for members to vocalize their intent to join.

The rationale:

Discussion on how to move forward with governance is currently taking place in multiple topics.

1. It's slow.
2. It lacks direction.
3. The input seems to only come from a handful of people anyway.

It's imperative that we come out stronger if we change our governance, and not have people feel we're almost rudderless. Considering that, and these three points, a Working Group with defined goals makes most sense to me. This adds possible timelines and therefore urgency, it provides direction and it fosters the momentum of engaged protocol members in a more efficient environment.

Possible goals/responsibilities:

1. Facilitate and improve governance.
2. Perform concurrent work on a full proposal to introduce a new Standing Party. There's a lot of overlap between what people want. Let's get a dedicated group on this.

Essentially, what the WG would be doing is actively drive governance as a focused group until such a time comes it's no longer felt as needed.

Sidenotes:

1. Obviously, as is customary, work is unpaid.
2. I'd like to cap membership to 5 slots.
 
Hi WB,

Thank you for posting this. I fully agree that we need to find way to coordinate the efforts to revitalise our governance given the vote to remove the guides as a standing party which has left us potentially rudderless as you say. I do not think that this is a replacement for the guides and the brief as you describe is to work for a short period to design and implement a system which will enable our governance to work effectively going forwards.

The group will need to bring together and build on the thinking done so far by David, Niels, Cryptologic (Doc002) and Cube3.

I would be happy to be part of such a group should that be agreeable to the community.
 
I wrote a document to start a working group last week but never posted as I was unsure whether there would be enough interest.

I would be happy to be part of the group, my feeling is that we will need to have daily 30 minute meetings initially with the goal of producing short term fixes to governance and proposals for longer-term removal / replacement of the guide role within the community.
 
Oh, great. Looking through the minutes I do remember seeing something about batch updates of documents to remove references to guides.

Will Keith be stepping out of the group since Matters has resigned?
Keith wanted to stay a part of the group, which is very appreciated. No one has to be an ANO member to contribute. On that note, if you are interested in joining, we'd be happy to have you. :)
 
Top