Which governance/accountability model do we want for this tool? Who and how should decisions being made?

[nukeador (Rubén Martín)]

The current proposal is to form a small team to own decision making and day-to-day operations of the tool.

Initially this group (@forums-governance) is formed by a few individuals who have been involved in the initial setup and implementation of the project and expressed their commitment to support during this first phase.

• Tobias Knerr (OSMF Board)
• Grant Slater (OSM Ops team)
• Rubén Martín (HOT Community Team)
• Christian Quest (OSM France)

* We understand the current people composition is not ideal and not the most diverse, and we want enable a space for it to grow and truly represent the groups who will be using this tool

This group will support an open a conversation with OSM communities to define how more diverse people can be part of this team and the requirements in terms of representation, commitment, accountability and leadership rotation.

Please use this topic to discuss about it and share your thoughts in how this team should operate.

• How the governance team should represent the people, communities and groups using the tool?
• How changes should be discussed, iterated and decisions communicated?
• How we ensure the accountability of this team?
• How we make sure there is a healthy leadership rotation?

We will be using this very same discourse instance to talk about how the work evolves and how decisions are being made.

Thanks!

[nukeador (Rubén Martín)]

Happy to announce that @cquest is joining the @forums-governance team.

This addition was suggested by the current team due Christian’s deep involvement with discourse and the French community, as well as his self-initiative to help and support the implementation and migrations to this new platform.

Welcome!

[fititnt (Rocha)]

The @forums-governance should be subject to the same rules defined to revalidare the moderators

Moderator selection criteria

Thanks everyone for your feedback and input in this topic. As a result, the @forums-governance team came up with five improvements to the initial proposal: In order to reduce the voting burden, polls to validate proposed moderators will only take place during the initial category creation or during later additions/removals of moderators when the evaluation of mods requirements fulfillment turn not to be obvious. The time for the initial discussion and voting will take 5 days each, but always …

[nukeador (Rubén Martín)]

Hello everyone,

I would like to announce that we reviewed the membership of this group and adapted to the members activity and commitment.

That’s why we have invited @pnorman to join the group. He’s been actively engaging, helping and thinking on how to move these forums forward.

At the same time, we want to note that we are working on a proposal to encourage and get new and more diverse members join and renew existing ones, to truly represent the groups and communities that are actively using this platform and care about its future.

Cheers.