Talk:OTW Board of Directors
placeholder thoughts for future page organization
So the attendance statistics are interesting, and I found some links to the context we could incorporate somehow:
- jennyst's original post
- fail fandomanon discussion
- jennyst's dreamwidth post that gives a more nuanced interpretation of the statistics
Maybe after more info is collected here, we can reshuffle the page or even create a separate page if the attendance topic is big enough. I liked having a quick reference to names and dates, and though I can see why statistics were grouped with the year they applied to, they do interrupt the flow. --æþel 02:36, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
- Good point, I did this so the attendance issue gets its own page Organization for Transformative Works/Board Meeting Attendance. --msilverstar (talk) 19:19, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Just made a big re-organization/substance edit -- apologies for not noting this in the parenthetical when I saved the page (I'm still new to Wiki stuff). I'm a staffer on the OTW's Communications committee. --Jintian 19:04, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
I think the mini-bio of the current board of directors would be better served in individual member's Fanlore entry. What do you think? --wistfuljane 05:54, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
- I can see doing that. I just did it this way for two reasons: (1) for a consistent look and feel with the OTW's Who We Are page and (2) it's also modeled on the Wikimedia Foundation's Advisory Board page. --Jintian 15:43, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, I can see where you were coming from. However, I think the Wikimedia Foundation's Advisory Board page is basically a website of the Wikimedia Foundation (Wikimedia Foundation website = OTW website), not an entry of Wiki's Wikimedia Foundation's Boards (Wiki entry for Wikimedia Foundation = Fanlore entry for OTW). In my opinion, the Wikimedia Foundation's Advisory Board page and Wikipedia's Wikimedia Foundation's Boards have different though some overlapping purposes. So I think this Fanlore page on OTW's Board of Directors should focus on OTW related information, which could include the board members' work for OTW as its board members, but I don't think it should be mini-biographies of each board members with information that is not OTW related. Those information could be better served under their own page about the individual, in my opinion.--wistfuljane 03:30, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
Change name to "Board of Directors"
Hi all, as we have such a wide potential audience who may not have expertise in organizational terminology, I think we should use "Board of Directors". I realize it's longer but I think clarity is more important here. --msilverstar (talk) 18:55, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me.--aethel (talk) 23:37, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
- Done --msilverstar (talk) 00:11, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Meetings
I think the section on Meetings is incorrect. It suggests that the number of public Board meetings in a year corresponds to the number of meeting minutes for that year. But, I think the pre-2017 Boards were publishing minutes from their non-public (closed) meetings on the website. Public Board meetings might have been more frequent in previous years, but the number of minutes on the website isn't evidence of that. I'm proposing to remove the table and edit the first sentance, to remove this suggestion, until there is more accurate information on historic meetings. I just want to flag that change here first, in case there's any objection? --Auntags (talk) 23:23, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
In some early years, every board meeting had a section open to all volunteers that was called public, though not the general public, and a private section. Definitely worth making it clear how the pattern has changed, and the change in meaning of public. --Cesy (talk) 07:05, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for explaining this distinction. Just wondering, was it open to the general public by 2015? I just noticed this line on the 2015 election page, "The Board normally meets every week or two and has an "open" portion during which staff, volunteers, and members of the public are invited to attend." -- Auntags (talk) 21:46, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
year numbering
Am I the only person who finds the year numbering confusing? For example, the 2023 election doesn't elect the 2023 board, it elects the 2024 board, except since board turnover happens 1 October and the election is in August (iirc), it's kind of the 2023-24 board and this also reads more clearly imo? I was thinking of changing the year numbering to include both years for clarity — thoughts? (ETA: the ones that don't match up with the calendar years, at least, as this is only true post-2015) Castille (talk) 12:27, 27 October 2024 (UTC)