Return to article

Talk:2010-2011 AGM/Candidates/Andrew Owens

< Talk:2010-2011 AGM
Revision as of 15:55, 15 August 2011 by Andrew Owens (talk | contribs) (removed section which contained defamatory statements and non-public information.)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Clarification regarding newsletters

I just wanted to clarify for members and other readers your reference to the newsletter. My idea to start a journal/newsletter came out of my meetings and discussions with the Wikimedia De communications staff in Berlin and I was inspired by a range of material I brought back from other chapters at the 2010 WMF chapters meeting in Germany. It's got nothing to do with the committee or the secretary role and I don't want to see a perception given to the community (or the committee, for that matter!) that it is a committee job or the secretary's responsibility. The secretary position already has a ton of work and I don't want future secretary candidates to be frightened off, thinking that they are going to have to write a newsletter if they take on the role. It's not a committee project and and it's definitely not a job or responsibility of the secretary. It will be sent to members with their membership packs but it is really just a personal project and it could just as easily be edited/written by a chapter member who is not on the committee. It is very different to the information pack which originated as a committee project and was proposed and developed at the committee's retreat in January. I just wanted to clarify this in case people reading got the mistaken perception that the newsletter was a committee project or secretary job or an idea that was developed by the committee as a group, like the info pack. Sarah 20:57, 13 September 2010 (EST)

Thanks Sarah - pretty much my thoughts exactly! I raised it in my statement only because it was evidence that WMAU is working harder to communicate with members constructively. Wikimedia Australia in its essence celebrates collectivity, we were born of a collective project, and I hope that once the first newsletter goes out then it will elicit contributions and suggestions from our membership who can contribute columns and such in future editions. For example we might have a column on current government goings-on (Gov 2.0 and its follow-ons), education, media, a member's experience of getting a project going, etc, meaning whoever takes on the newsletter position would basically be an editor and compiler. A committee my dad is on went through exactly the same process a couple of years ago so I have seen how it evolves - the editor needs nerves of steel to keep the contributors on track though :)
With the info pack - I wish it was a committee project! It was certainly allocated by the committee but has not been allocated the resources necessary to ensure its success. My own ingenuity may well be enough to get it over the line - when I uploaded the parts I had completed three months ago, one person said it looked good - but I'm hoping that the new committee who are coming in with "fresh eyes" will be able to offer more concrete feedback and assistance. Orderinchaos 21:45, 13 September 2010 (EST)