Difference between revisions of "Ddevault/reforms"

From Technologia Incognita
Jump to: navigation, search
(→‎Reforming member introductions)
 
(10 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
== Draft: TechInc reforms ==
+
== TechInc reforms ==
  
−
WIP proposal for some future ALV
+
This is where I am keeping notes for my proposals to improve TechInc. Some of this will become ALV agenda items.
  
 
'''Goals'''
 
'''Goals'''
Line 14: Line 14:
 
=== Reforming member introductions ===
 
=== Reforming member introductions ===
  
−
The board should not be involved in onboarding new members; instead this responsibility should fall to other members. This requires:
+
The board should not be soley responsible for onboarding new members. The board is legally liable for the association and the behavior of its members, so they still need to be in the loop. However, a process should be established through which non-board members can perform member onboarding, and the board can, on the advice of a trusted & trained member, rubber stamp the new membership.
  
−
* The completion of the effort to establish a membership maintenance system, such that the collection of important information is handled by an automated/idiot-proof system that does not require special board training
+
We should also eliminate the hour-long tour and boil it down to the essentials, or offload some of the tour information onto the wiki.
−
* A discussion among members to decide what kind of information should be conveyed to new members and to establish the cultural values we should be handing off to new members
 
  
−
Note: quoting the statutes: "Members are they who have enlisted with the board as a member and have been allowed to the association as such by the board. In the event of non-admission by the board the general assembly can still decide to admit."
+
* What information needs to be included in the tour?
 +
* What information needs to be collected from the members, and where is it stored?
 +
* How to maintain the list of members who are trusted to do onboarding?
  
−
Should figure this part out. Can the board delegate this responsibility? Can they show tacit agreement to the introduction of new members through the existence of the membership system? Can the "official" admittance of new members be a simple rubber-stamping operation conducted by the board every so often?
+
Should we establish an onboarding committee in the house rules?
 +
 
 +
Buddy system baby
  
 
=== Curtailing committees ===
 
=== Curtailing committees ===
Line 36: Line 39:
 
* Dispute committee: this is necessary for keeping the peace and moderating conflicts within the space, but should be reformed; see below
 
* Dispute committee: this is necessary for keeping the peace and moderating conflicts within the space, but should be reformed; see below
  
−
=== Modifying the role of the dispute committee ===
+
Moved to formal proposal at [[Huishoudelijk_Reglement/Proposed#Reforming_committees]]
−
 
 
−
I propose a change to the dispute committee wherein:
 
  
−
* They can call for specific actions to resolve disputes, rather than relying on the board to do so, and
+
=== Dispute committee reforms ===
−
* Present their findings at an ALV (perhaps an out-of-schedule ALV if required) and call for a vote among members should they find certain sanctions to be appropriate (e.g. expulsion of members)
 
  
−
I think this should be accompanied by a resignation of the current committee and a re-election of new members (the previous roster can stand for re-election if they so desire).
+
Need:
  
−
Thus, the board's power to sanction or remove members is rescinded and their role in organizational governance is reduced and handed over to the community.
+
* Onboarding process for new members
 +
* Better management of internal committee policy
 +
* Better visibility from member body into how to interact with this committee
  
−
Calling for a vote at the ALV might be problematic if it involves revealing details of an incident that a victim may not want to share. As an alternative we could increase the committee membership to five and require a unanimous vote to take more severe sanctions (e.g. expulsion of a member).
+
Will rewrite the wiki page. Draft: [[SubGroups/Dispute/Draft]]
  
 
=== Streamlining the ALV process ===
 
=== Streamlining the ALV process ===
Line 59: Line 61:
  
 
Random idea: maybe the board should not be sitting up front for this? Gathering all members into a circle, board included, might be better vibes
 
Random idea: maybe the board should not be sitting up front for this? Gathering all members into a circle, board included, might be better vibes
 +
 +
=== Draft a code of conduct for the space ===
 +
 +
See [[Ddevault/conduct]]
  
 
== TODO ==
 
== TODO ==
Line 67: Line 73:
 
* Draft specific changes to relevant policies and/or houserules
 
* Draft specific changes to relevant policies and/or houserules
 
* Figure out all of the little things the board is doing that should be handled by members
 
* Figure out all of the little things the board is doing that should be handled by members
−
* Talk to existing board members and circulate the draft among a few members for comment
+
* Talk to existing board members and circulate the draft(s) among a few members for comment
−
* Prep these changes in the form of an ALV proposal
+
* Prep ALV proposal(s)
 
* Draft update to [[Rules]] that better illustrates the member's role in making the space work
 
* Draft update to [[Rules]] that better illustrates the member's role in making the space work
−
* Draft email to all members explaining the changes, their motivation, and our desired cultural values
+
* Toool was never voted on despite a vote being required by the house rules, should address this
−
* Address the toool questions?
 
−
* Elaborate on the role of members in the space
 

Latest revision as of 00:33, 14 February 2023

TechInc reforms

This is where I am keeping notes for my proposals to improve TechInc. Some of this will become ALV agenda items.

Goals

  • Implement a renewed sense of communal ownership and responsibility among space members over the association
  • Reduce the workload and importance of the board

Renaming the board

I propose to rename the board, for internal purposes, to the Executors of Legal Faffery, and its members as "elfs", to reduce the sense that they hold a special position of authority in the space (alternative usage: Executors of Logistical Faffery, when called for). Naturally we can still refer to them as "the board" in official documents to the extent which is necessary to meet our legal obligations.

Reforming member introductions

The board should not be soley responsible for onboarding new members. The board is legally liable for the association and the behavior of its members, so they still need to be in the loop. However, a process should be established through which non-board members can perform member onboarding, and the board can, on the advice of a trusted & trained member, rubber stamp the new membership.

We should also eliminate the hour-long tour and boil it down to the essentials, or offload some of the tour information onto the wiki.

  • What information needs to be included in the tour?
  • What information needs to be collected from the members, and where is it stored?
  • How to maintain the list of members who are trusted to do onboarding?

Should we establish an onboarding committee in the house rules?

Buddy system baby

Curtailing committees

The idea of an official, elected list of committees runs counter to the culture we should have. The committees mostly don't function for their intended purpose and all initiatives within TechInc should be informal, member-run grassroots affairs. The following committees should be removed and replaced with simple "projects" with no formally defined role:

  • Media committee
  • Space maintenance committee
  • Event committee

The following committees should be retained:

  • Auditing committee: this is useful for providing a check on the elfs and ensuring that we meet our legal and fiscal responsibilities
  • Dispute committee: this is necessary for keeping the peace and moderating conflicts within the space, but should be reformed; see below

Moved to formal proposal at Huishoudelijk_Reglement/Proposed#Reforming_committees

Dispute committee reforms

Need:

  • Onboarding process for new members
  • Better management of internal committee policy
  • Better visibility from member body into how to interact with this committee

Will rewrite the wiki page. Draft: SubGroups/Dispute/Draft

Streamlining the ALV process

The agenda of the ALV should be strictly limited to:

  • Legally required proceedings
  • Votes on proposals issued prior to the ALV

Discussions regarding proposals and other issues should mostly happen among members prior to the ALV. Could be made easier with better dissemination of the agenda and encouraging members to schedule discussions on proposals prior to the ALV for those who are interested in digging into them further.

Random idea: maybe the board should not be sitting up front for this? Gathering all members into a circle, board included, might be better vibes

Draft a code of conduct for the space

See Ddevault/conduct

TODO

Notes to self:

  • I want to be on the next member tour so I can see what's involved
  • Draft specific changes to relevant policies and/or houserules
  • Figure out all of the little things the board is doing that should be handled by members
  • Talk to existing board members and circulate the draft(s) among a few members for comment
  • Prep ALV proposal(s)
  • Draft update to Rules that better illustrates the member's role in making the space work
  • Toool was never voted on despite a vote being required by the house rules, should address this
Retrieved from "https://wiki.techinc.nl/index.php?title=Ddevault/reforms&oldid=27206"