View source for Meeting Notes 2023-01-11

== Communications ==

Let's talk about augmenting our current email discussion list with 

* Dischord server? (it doesn't cost money like slack)

== Proposal: Working groups ==
 

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