Difference between revisions of "Proposed agenda items for future Core Group meetings"

Revision as of 14:19, 18 February 2012

[1]

Feel free to list discussion topics / issues you'd like to bring to the table of the core group for a future chat.

Please don't forget to add your name and date of suggestion along with your topic.

• (Ewen, July 21 2011, based on discussion April 2011) Criteria for the selection of steering group (Peter B 20110721: which steering group is this, the one for the IFAD project?) members;
  
• (Ewen, July 21 2011, based on discussion April 2011) Exact arrangements on the buddying system in KM4Dev and recruiting new core group members (Peter B 20110721 do we still distinguish between core groupers and additional volunteers for facilitation? These volunteers are different from the km4dev2011 ones we are looking for!): 
  
• (Peter 20110721): revisit and publish the facilitation volunteers list and start buddying where necessary;

• (Riff - June 2 2011) Steering committee for the IFAD project. We then need to figure out:
  • criteria/remuneration for SC members
  • process for identifying same
  • whether/how SC members could do project activities
• Possible funding for the KM4Dev journal? (Ewen - 7 June 2011)
  
• Coming back to Davide Piga and introducing the new wiki (Peter 20110721 is the new km4dev wiki already online? If yes can we add a link here?) to the wider community? (Ewen - 7 June 2011). See message below
  

About Davide's wiki work Great (that Davide Piga finished the wiki upgrade and that he gave an interview to John) - and indeed we should definitely get back to him. Re: separation of tasks, personally I prefer to follow the technology front from a distance (I'm more like a power user than a techy) but happy to chip in on how to connect the technology and the community i.e. introducing it, explaining, engaging etc.

So in terms of decision-making I guess we need to: - Have a look at the new structure and decide what's good about it and what could be improved - I had a brief look and at first sight it looks quite nice really, but a thorough visit would help - maybe from the perspective of administrators and of users. - Review the wiki pages content-wise to make sure it's all up to date; - Inform the community about the switch (assuming it's done soon), introducing the new features (and probably taking advantage to doing a tour around the wiki) and inviting them to create a wiki profile to use it for their purpose and to summarise discussion threads? - Decide how to go about active monitoring i.e. reviewing content every now and then to make sure it's easy enough to find info and to archive old stuff if need be and also monitoring the technology as a whole.