Hey Sudoers,
I'd like to submit a proposal in advance of a meeting next Wednesday, January 11th at 8 PM:
The proposal: I propose we organize working groups for membership, facilities, finances, promotion, and general administration.
The goals:
I think we should focus in 2023 on bringing in new people. Hosting more
events. Finding new sources of revenue like grants. Organizing the
tools, repairing the roof, and installing a mezzanine. I think all of
these would be more attainable if we had a bit of structure that makes
it easier for new people -- and old! -- to find similarly minded
collaborators and organize and communicate to do these things
collaboratively.
The details: I see three elements to this proposal, which I'm listing to make it easier to offer suggestions or alterations:
1)
I think we should define a set of core functions which require
coordination: membership, facilities, finances, promotion, and
administration (miscellaneous general operation).
2)
I think we should promote coordination by establishing working groups,
primarily consisting of an email list and a wiki page, but with broad
leeway in how each group wants to organize and communicate. The
facilities working group could decide to set up a Discord channel. The
building group could choose to have regular in person meetings. The
admin group could operate mostly on Signal. These don't have to be
dictated in this proposal, as long as everyone knows how to get in touch
with these working groups.
3)
I propose that participation and role assignment be presumed open, but
managed by the groups themselves. I am actively choosing not to propose
that they groups have a leader or a minimum number of participants, or a
qualification to join. As proposed, I imagine anyone who likes fixing
3D printers when they clog can sign up for the facilities working group
and now they're an equal member to everyone else. But if the membership
working group is just one person answering new member questions, that's
fine. The finance group and promotion group will presumably set
guidelines on who has login credentials for accounts. Under this
proposal, anyone can join any group and no member of a group has
elevated privileges unless they establish them by consensus separate
from this proposal.
What do you all think? Would you like to join any of these groups? I'd
like to get lots of feedback and then discuss this next Wednesday to
incorporate the feedback received over email.
Cheers,
Andy
_______________________________________________