Consumerium governance: Difference between revisions

    From Consumerium development wiki R&D Wiki
    (had name wrong)
    (hmm...)
    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.

    Revision as of 20:12, 19 June 2003

    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 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).
    • 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 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.