Consumerium governance

Consumerium governance is how it runs itself. Because Consumerium seeks to empower consumers 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 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 - and m:Wikimedia board for an example of how not to do things!

• picking the right balance of tools, rules and fools. We hate 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 Business Software Alliance) has some benefits but is mostly just oppressive. 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.