Re: [atlarge-discuss] RE: [atlarge-panel] Web Site Updates?

["Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>]

There's nothing wrong with defining clear processes and insisting that these
are adhered to. Judyth's comments are spot on. The clearer the definition,
the less likely that a minority will try to hijack the org with their own
agenda or fate itself will effect a shambles. The only people who don't
welcome clarity are the people who have something to hide. Let's proceed
with the procedures and be precise and clear. Process is not the end of it
all but it protects the integrity and ultimately makes things work better.

Richard H

----- Original Message -----
From: <espresso@e-scape.net>
To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 9:35 PM
Subject: RE: [atlarge-discuss] RE: [atlarge-panel] Web Site Updates?


At 22:22 -0800 2002/11/20, Bruce Young wrote:
>Remember the concept of Span of Control?  If you are giving someone the
>responsibility (in this case to run the Web site!), you give him the
>authority that goes with it.

Perhaps I've missed something somewhere but I think, like Bruce, that giving
somebody a responsibility also means giving them the necessary authority.

However, where we *may* be parting company is over just what authority
belongs to whom. To my mind, the model for WG-Web I described earlier works
like this in terms of lines of authority:

The membership "at large" gives the Panel authority to conduct the routine
business of the organization and perform a certain policy mandate which
(presumably) includes appointment of a Webmaster and receiving reports from
the Webmaster and WG-Web to inform its deliberations.

The Panel authorizes a Webmaster:
- to deal with the technical aspects of running the organization's Web
site, - to propose software and design aspects of the organization's Web
presence as a whole,
- to install or post whatever is decided upon as suitable,
- to take the necessary preventive measures to secure the site from hack
attacks and unauthorized FTPs, etc.
- to take prompt action to mitigate damage when something goes wrong,
- to recommend software, methods and procedures to ensure regular updating,
ongoing improvements to presentation, addition of links to relevant
materials in a timely manner, etc.
It also charges the Webmaster with the responsibility of regularly reporting
on the above and carrying out instructions the Panel and WG-Web may make in
the light of those reports.

The membership authorizes the WG-Web:
- to ensure that all aspects of the Web site, mailing lists and forums,
including usability and language issues, are properly followed up on an
ongoing basis,
- to discuss issues and propose policies relating to "best practices" and
processes involved in operating the Web site, lists and forums, including
policies on linkage to external sites and production of human-readable
summaries of complex materials found elsewhere,
- to ask the Panel to call for a membership vote on WG-Web's recommendations
when necessary,
- to ask the Webmaster to post approved documents and correct technical or
editorial problems (without requiring a Panel or membership vote each time a
broken link or typo needs fixing)
- to delegate to individual volunteers (within the WG or otherwise) specific
responsibility for smaller parts of its mandate (e.g., re: list management
or monitoring of forum activity).

In this model, all of the parties involved are volunteers, not unpaid
employees. Their opinions matter and any differences must be resolved
through civilized discussion within WG-Web, with the Panel's assistance, or
by a vote of the membership as the ultimate authority.

In that kind of environment, there is no reason why the Webmaster must be
the Chair of WG-Web, nor does the Chair of WG-Web have any more authority
than any other member *except* insofar as he/she is responsible for keeping
the WG-Web's discussions organized and civilized to ensure it fulfils its
functions.

By the same token, the Webmaster has the authority to oversee all technical
aspects of the Web site, to make any recommendations s/he can based on
her/his particular expertise, and to take emergency action when necessary.
but neither has nor needs any authority over WG-Web or its editorial or
policy-recommending aspects.

The Webmaster should not be the only person in the group with FTP access,
knowledge of passwords, etc. In practice, nobody else should be *using*
those things ... but Webmasters, like other mortals, are subject to life's
vagaries. We don't want to face a situation where a future Webmaster's
sudden illness or departure means nobody can step in to fill the gap.

The goal, I think, is for ICANNATLARGE.ORG to become a
permanently-established, functional organization which can continue to serve
its membership well regardless of who occupies which seat within its Panel,
committees or administrative roles.

My ideas may strike some as needlessly formal and bureaucratic (not to
mention uncool) but I'm afraid they are based on the sad reality that
organizations which do not take steps to establish good procedures and the
habit of making sure things are approved before they are executed may soon
find themselves falling apart.

Sometimes all it takes is the departure of two or three key people to make a
shambles of everything; at others, it's enough to have a few newcomers
decide it is easier to turn the organization into an autocracy than to read
and properly amend previous decisions and let the members vote on the change
of direction. I'm now dealing with the repercussions of the influx of a
handful of "clean-sweep" types into two other organizations and I sure as
heck don't want to see it happen here.

Most sincerely,

Judyth


##########################################################
Judyth Mermelstein     "cogito ergo lego ergo cogito..."
Montreal, QC           <espresso@e-scape.net>
##########################################################
"A word to the wise is sufficient. For others, use more."
##########################################################



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de