Consumerium governance - Revision history

142.177.108.161 at 23:45, 25 January 2005

2005-01-25T23:45:56Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:45, 25 January 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''[[Consumerium]] [[governance]]''' is how it runs [[Consumerium:itself\|itself]] - the [[protocol]] that keeps everything "fair and above board". This should be as close to a [[formal protocol]] as possible.		'''[[Consumerium]] [[governance]]''' is how it runs [[Consumerium:itself\|itself]] - the [[protocol]] that keeps everything "fair and above board". This should be as close to a [[formal protocol]] as possible.

			== continuous improvement ==

			While [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] deals with daily issues of [[Publish:governance]], [[Research:governance]] and building a [[healthy signal infrastructure]], what it does must be formalized into:
			*[[publish protocol]] to keep generating a [[Consumerium buying signal]] that satisfies [[individual buying criteria]] and [[institutional buying criteria]] of uesers
			*[[research protocol]] to keep gathering and filtering data from all [[faction]]s for all [[individual buying criteria]]
			*[[integration protocol]] to keep funding servers and expansion that meets our own [[institutional buying criteria]] and creates [[healthy signal infrastructure]]

	Because Consumerium seeks to empower [[consumer]]s to affect [[corporate governance]] and perhaps [[government]] attitude to [[trade]], it should be a very good example of governance responsible to our [[values]]. Whatever they are.		Because Consumerium seeks to empower [[consumer]]s to affect [[corporate governance]] and perhaps [[government]] attitude to [[trade]], it should be a very good example of governance responsible to our [[values]]. Whatever they are.

	~~It is clear that Consumerium has and will continue to have a [[Consumerium:Systemic bias]] based on the values of the people building it. This must be inverted, by applying a~~ counter-bias ~~in the governance protocol. Specific issues in Consumerium governance are:~~		== counter-bias ==

	*choice of a [[Consumerium ~~board~~]] - ~~by default now it is just~~ [[~~User:Juxo~~]] or ~~"Chairman Juxo" or "Chief Gardener Juxo" or "Janitor Juxo" or whatever title he likes~~. ~~''see~~ [[m:Wikipedia Governance]] for debate on one-man rule over there.''		It is clear that Consumerium has and will continue to have a [[Consumerium:Systemic bias]] based on the values of the people building it. This must be inverted, by applying a counter-bias in governance. ''Note: [[Wikimedia]] does the exact opposite! It must not be copied in this respect or [[CGO]] will fail. See [[m:Wikipedia Governance]] for debate on one-man rule over there. See also [[GodKing]].''

			== issues ==

			Specific issues in Consumerium governance are:

			*choice of a [[Consumerium board]] - by default now it is just [[User:Juxo]] or "Chairman Juxo" or "Chief Gardener Juxo" or "Janitor Juxo" or whatever title he likes.
	*choice of [[licenses]] - note that there are few contributors now, and it is not too late to require that all contributions accept that a change of license be possible later, under the terms of governance we eventually work out for that (in other words notify that unless you object in such and such a time after a notice of change of license, the material is under a new license, and you lose rights to say fork off a new project with the old material without problems).		*choice of [[licenses]] - note that there are few contributors now, and it is not too late to require that all contributions accept that a change of license be possible later, under the terms of governance we eventually work out for that (in other words notify that unless you object in such and such a time after a notice of change of license, the material is under a new license, and you lose rights to say fork off a new project with the old material without problems).

	*ways of assessing [[Consumerium:project future\|project future]] and [[project status quo]] - ''see [[m:governance]] for some ways to do this, not sure if they've been tried.''		*ways of assessing [[Consumerium:project future\|project future]] and [[project status quo]] - ''see [[m:governance]] for some ways to do this, not sure if they've been tried.''
			*other things that might have to be listed in a [[board manual]] - ''see [[m:board manual]] for a possible starting point for Consumerium's board - and [[m:Wikimedia board]] for an example of how not to do things!''
			*picking the right balance of tools, rules and fools. We hate [[w:bureaucracy\|bureaucracy]] for practical reasons, but sometimes zero-bureaucracy (like [[GPL]]) just leads you into more control by official bureaucrats and wasting your life defending your work. High-bureaucracy (like [[w:Business Software Alliance\|Business Software Alliance]]) has some benefits but is mostly just oppressive. [[w:Consortium\|Consortium]] usually fall in between and balance a little more bureaucracy and obligation up front with a way to manage unforseen events later on, the main reason to even consider '''governance''' important.

	*other things that might have to be listed in a [[board manual]] - ''see [[m:board manual]] for a possible starting point for Consumerium's board - and [[m:Wikimedia board]] for an example of how not to do things!''		== interim step ==

	*picking the right balance of tools, rules and fools. We hate [[w:bureaucracy\|bureaucracy]] for practical reasons, but sometimes zero-bureaucracy (like [[GPL]]) just leads you into more control by official bureaucrats and wasting your life defending your work. High-bureaucracy (like [[w:Business Software Alliance\|Business Software Alliance]]) has some benefits but is ~~mostly just oppressive.~~ [[~~w:Consortium\|Consortium~~]] ~~usually fall in between and balance a little more bureaucracy and obligation up front with a way~~ to ~~manage unforseen events later~~ on~~, the main reason to even consider '''governance''' important.~~		It is not reasonable to expect all [[protocol]] to work on day one without gathering expertise of experienced people:

	Eventually a [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] must take over from the founders, and regulate the '''Consumerium governance''' protocol in a fairer way than any of us can manage - we are not so foolish as to imagine that this means always relying on the original [[Consumerium board]]. It must be assumed that eventually the project is too complex and contentious to be "controlled" by anyone, and that the organization/board is primarily trying to [[obsolete itself]]. This probably is its ''only'' "job". A [[Transparent Consumerium]] would use the CGO only to resolve disputes that arise about the CGP fairness.		Eventually a [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] must take over from the founders, and regulate the '''Consumerium governance''' protocol in a fairer way than any of us can manage - we are not so foolish as to imagine that this means always relying on the original [[Consumerium board]]. It must be assumed that eventually the project is too complex and contentious to be "controlled" by anyone, and that the organization/board is primarily trying to [[obsolete itself]]. This probably is its ''only'' "job". A [[Transparent Consumerium]] would use the CGO only to resolve disputes that arise about the CGP fairness.

142.177.7.86 at 02:16, 27 October 2003

2003-10-27T02:16:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:16, 27 October 2003
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''[[Consumerium]] [[governance]]''' is how it runs itself. Because Consumerium seeks to empower [[consumer]]s to affect [[corporate governance]] and perhaps [[government]] attitude to ~~this~~, it should be a very good example of governance responsible to our [[values]]. Whatever they are. It is clear that Consumerium has and will continue to have a [[Consumerium:Systemic bias]] based on the values of the people building it. Specific issues in Consumerium governance are:		'''[[Consumerium]] [[governance]]''' is how it runs [[Consumerium:itself\|itself]] - the [[protocol]] that keeps everything "fair and above board". This should be as close to a [[formal protocol]] as possible.

			Because Consumerium seeks to empower [[consumer]]s to affect [[corporate governance]] and perhaps [[government]] attitude to [[trade]], it should be a very good example of governance responsible to our [[values]]. Whatever they are.

			It is clear that Consumerium has and will continue to have a [[Consumerium:Systemic bias]] based on the values of the people building it. This must be inverted, by applying a counter-bias in the governance protocol. Specific issues in Consumerium governance are:

	*choice of a [[Consumerium board]] - by default now it is just [[User:Juxo]] or "Chairman Juxo" or "Chief Gardener Juxo" or "Janitor Juxo" or whatever title he likes. ''see [[m:Wikipedia Governance]] for debate on one-man rule over there.''		*choice of a [[Consumerium board]] - by default now it is just [[User:Juxo]] or "Chairman Juxo" or "Chief Gardener Juxo" or "Janitor Juxo" or whatever title he likes. ''see [[m:Wikipedia Governance]] for debate on one-man rule over there.''
Line 11:		Line 15:
	*picking the right balance of tools, rules and fools. We hate [[w:bureaucracy\|bureaucracy]] for practical reasons, but sometimes zero-bureaucracy (like [[GPL]]) just leads you into more control by official bureaucrats and wasting your life defending your work. High-bureaucracy (like [[w:Business Software Alliance\|Business Software Alliance]]) has some benefits but is mostly just oppressive. [[w:Consortium\|Consortium]] usually fall in between and balance a little more bureaucracy and obligation up front with a way to manage unforseen events later on, the main reason to even consider '''governance''' important.		*picking the right balance of tools, rules and fools. We hate [[w:bureaucracy\|bureaucracy]] for practical reasons, but sometimes zero-bureaucracy (like [[GPL]]) just leads you into more control by official bureaucrats and wasting your life defending your work. High-bureaucracy (like [[w:Business Software Alliance\|Business Software Alliance]]) has some benefits but is mostly just oppressive. [[w:Consortium\|Consortium]] usually fall in between and balance a little more bureaucracy and obligation up front with a way to manage unforseen events later on, the main reason to even consider '''governance''' important.

	Eventually a [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] must take over from the founders~~. This may or may~~ not ~~be supervised by~~ the original [[Consumerium board]]. It must be assumed that eventually the project is too complex and contentious to be "controlled" by anyone, and that the organization/board is primarily trying to [[obsolete itself]]. This probably is its ''only'' "job".		Eventually a [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] must take over from the founders, and regulate the '''Consumerium governance''' protocol in a fairer way than any of us can manage - we are not so foolish as to imagine that this means always relying on the original [[Consumerium board]]. It must be assumed that eventually the project is too complex and contentious to be "controlled" by anyone, and that the organization/board is primarily trying to [[obsolete itself]]. This probably is its ''only'' "job". A [[Transparent Consumerium]] would use the CGO only to resolve disputes that arise about the CGP fairness.

142.177.7.86 at 01:33, 27 October 2003

2003-10-27T01:33:15Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:33, 27 October 2003
Line 10:		Line 10:

	*picking the right balance of tools, rules and fools. We hate [[w:bureaucracy\|bureaucracy]] for practical reasons, but sometimes zero-bureaucracy (like [[GPL]]) just leads you into more control by official bureaucrats and wasting your life defending your work. High-bureaucracy (like [[w:Business Software Alliance\|Business Software Alliance]]) has some benefits but is mostly just oppressive. [[w:Consortium\|Consortium]] usually fall in between and balance a little more bureaucracy and obligation up front with a way to manage unforseen events later on, the main reason to even consider '''governance''' important.		*picking the right balance of tools, rules and fools. We hate [[w:bureaucracy\|bureaucracy]] for practical reasons, but sometimes zero-bureaucracy (like [[GPL]]) just leads you into more control by official bureaucrats and wasting your life defending your work. High-bureaucracy (like [[w:Business Software Alliance\|Business Software Alliance]]) has some benefits but is mostly just oppressive. [[w:Consortium\|Consortium]] usually fall in between and balance a little more bureaucracy and obligation up front with a way to manage unforseen events later on, the main reason to even consider '''governance''' important.

			Eventually a [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] must take over from the founders. This may or may not be supervised by the original [[Consumerium board]]. It must be assumed that eventually the project is too complex and contentious to be "controlled" by anyone, and that the organization/board is primarily trying to [[obsolete itself]]. This probably is its ''only'' "job".

142.177.97.205 at 21:36, 15 August 2003

2003-08-15T21:36:41Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:36, 15 August 2003
Line 7:		Line 7:
	*ways of assessing [[Consumerium:project future\|project future]] and [[project status quo]] - ''see [[m:governance]] for some ways to do this, not sure if they've been tried.''		*ways of assessing [[Consumerium:project future\|project future]] and [[project status quo]] - ''see [[m:governance]] for some ways to do this, not sure if they've been tried.''

	*other things that might have to be listed in a [[board manual]] - ''see [[m:board manual]] for a possible starting point for Consumerium's board.''		*other things that might have to be listed in a [[board manual]] - ''see [[m:board manual]] for a possible starting point for Consumerium's board - and [[m:Wikimedia board]] for an example of how not to do things!''

	*picking the right balance of tools, rules and fools. We hate [[w:bureaucracy\|bureaucracy]] for practical reasons, but sometimes zero-bureaucracy (like [[GPL]]) just leads you into more control by official bureaucrats and wasting your life defending your work. High-bureaucracy (like [[w:Business Software Alliance\|Business Software Alliance]]) has some benefits but is mostly just oppressive. [[w:Consortium\|Consortium]] usually fall in between and balance a little more bureaucracy and obligation up front with a way to manage unforseen events later on, the main reason to even consider '''governance''' important.		*picking the right balance of tools, rules and fools. We hate [[w:bureaucracy\|bureaucracy]] for practical reasons, but sometimes zero-bureaucracy (like [[GPL]]) just leads you into more control by official bureaucrats and wasting your life defending your work. High-bureaucracy (like [[w:Business Software Alliance\|Business Software Alliance]]) has some benefits but is mostly just oppressive. [[w:Consortium\|Consortium]] usually fall in between and balance a little more bureaucracy and obligation up front with a way to manage unforseen events later on, the main reason to even consider '''governance''' important.

Jukeboksi: hmm...

2003-06-19T20:12:59Z

hmm...

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:12, 19 June 2003
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''[[Consumerium]] [[governance]]''' is how it runs itself. Because Consumerium seeks to ~~change~~ [[corporate governance]] and perhaps [[government]] attitude to this, it should be a very good example of governance responsible to our [[values]]. Whatever they are. Specific issues in Consumerium governance are:		'''[[Consumerium]] [[governance]]''' is how it runs itself. Because Consumerium seeks to empower [[consumer]]s to affect [[corporate governance]] and perhaps [[government]] attitude to this, it should be a very good example of governance responsible to our [[values]]. Whatever they are. It is clear that Consumerium has and will continue to have a [[Consumerium:Systemic bias]] based on the values of the people building it. Specific issues in Consumerium governance are:

	*choice of a [[Consumerium board]] - by default now it is just [[User:Juxo]] or "Chairman Juxo" or "Chief Gardener Juxo" or "Janitor Juxo" or whatever title he likes. ''see [[m:Wikipedia Governance]] for debate on one-man rule over there.''		*choice of a [[Consumerium board]] - by default now it is just [[User:Juxo]] or "Chairman Juxo" or "Chief Gardener Juxo" or "Janitor Juxo" or whatever title he likes. ''see [[m:Wikipedia Governance]] for debate on one-man rule over there.''
Line 5:		Line 5:
	*choice of [[licenses]] - note that there are few contributors now, and it is not too late to require that all contributions accept that a change of license be possible later, under the terms of governance we eventually work out for that (in other words notify that unless you object in such and such a time after a notice of change of license, the material is under a new license, and you lose rights to say fork off a new project with the old material without problems).		*choice of [[licenses]] - note that there are few contributors now, and it is not too late to require that all contributions accept that a change of license be possible later, under the terms of governance we eventually work out for that (in other words notify that unless you object in such and such a time after a notice of change of license, the material is under a new license, and you lose rights to say fork off a new project with the old material without problems).

	*ways of assessing [[project future]] and [[project status quo]] - ''see [[m:governance]] for some ways to do this, not sure if they've been tried.''		*ways of assessing [[Consumerium:project future\|project future]] and [[project status quo]] - ''see [[m:governance]] for some ways to do this, not sure if they've been tried.''

	*other things that might have to be listed in a [[board manual]] - ''see [[m:board manual]] for a possible starting point for Consumerium's board.''		*other things that might have to be listed in a [[board manual]] - ''see [[m:board manual]] for a possible starting point for Consumerium's board.''

	*picking the right balance of tools, rules and fools. We hate [[bureaucracy]] but sometimes zero-bureaucracy (like [[GPL]]) just leads you into more control by official bureaucrats and wasting your life defending your work. High-bureaucracy (like [[w:Business Software Alliance]]) has some benefits but is mostly just oppressive. [[~~Consortia~~]] usually fall in between and balance a little more bureaucracy and obligation up front with a way to manage unforseen events later on, the main reason to even consider '''governance''' important.		*picking the right balance of tools, rules and fools. We hate [[w:bureaucracy\|bureaucracy]] for practical reasons, but sometimes zero-bureaucracy (like [[GPL]]) just leads you into more control by official bureaucrats and wasting your life defending your work. High-bureaucracy (like [[w:Business Software Alliance\|Business Software Alliance]]) has some benefits but is mostly just oppressive. [[w:Consortium\|Consortium]] usually fall in between and balance a little more bureaucracy and obligation up front with a way to manage unforseen events later on, the main reason to even consider '''governance''' important.

142.177.12.33: had name wrong

2003-06-19T20:08:11Z

had name wrong

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:08, 19 June 2003
Line 9:		Line 9:
	*other things that might have to be listed in a [[board manual]] - ''see [[m:board manual]] for a possible starting point for Consumerium's board.''		*other things that might have to be listed in a [[board manual]] - ''see [[m:board manual]] for a possible starting point for Consumerium's board.''

	*picking the right balance of tools, rules and fools. We hate [[bureaucracy]] but sometimes zero-bureaucracy (like [[GPL]]) just leads you into more control by official bureaucrats and wasting your life defending your work. High-bureaucracy (like [[w:Software ~~Business~~ Alliance]]) has some benefits but is mostly just oppressive. [[Consortia]] usually fall in between.		*picking the right balance of tools, rules and fools. We hate [[bureaucracy]] but sometimes zero-bureaucracy (like [[GPL]]) just leads you into more control by official bureaucrats and wasting your life defending your work. High-bureaucracy (like [[w:Business Software Alliance]]) has some benefits but is mostly just oppressive. [[Consortia]] usually fall in between and balance a little more bureaucracy and obligation up front with a way to manage unforseen events later on, the main reason to even consider '''governance''' important.

142.177.12.33: crude, some OK links

2003-06-19T20:03:37Z

crude, some OK links

New page

'''[[Consumerium]] [[governance]]''' is how it runs itself. Because Consumerium seeks to change [[corporate governance]] and perhaps [[government]] attitude to this, it should be a very good example of governance responsible to our [[values]]. Whatever they are. Specific issues in Consumerium governance are:

*choice of a [[Consumerium board]] - by default now it is just [[User:Juxo]] or "Chairman Juxo" or "Chief Gardener Juxo" or "Janitor Juxo" or whatever title he likes. ''see [[m:Wikipedia Governance]] for debate on one-man rule over there.''

*choice of [[licenses]] - note that there are few contributors now, and it is not too late to require that all contributions accept that a change of license be possible later, under the terms of governance we eventually work out for that (in other words notify that unless you object in such and such a time after a notice of change of license, the material is under a new license, and you lose rights to say fork off a new project with the old material without problems).

*ways of assessing [[project future]] and [[project status quo]] - ''see [[m:governance]] for some ways to do this, not sure if they've been tried.''

*other things that might have to be listed in a [[board manual]] - ''see [[m:board manual]] for a possible starting point for Consumerium's board.''

*picking the right balance of tools, rules and fools. We hate [[bureaucracy]] but sometimes zero-bureaucracy (like [[GPL]]) just leads you into more control by official bureaucrats and wasting your life defending your work. High-bureaucracy (like [[w:Software Business Alliance]]) has some benefits but is mostly just oppressive. [[Consortia]] usually fall in between.