Conference call on 7 p.m. EST, 26 June 2005.
The board requests that everyone who attends a conference call or wants to be involved with FC.o administration / decision-making:
- Create an account on the wiki
- Learn how the wiki works
- Make a user page on the wiki
- Keep a public to-do list
Hopefully this will have three effects:
- Centralize more information on the wiki
- Make the wiki less a ghetto (with many eyes, all ghettos are shallow)
- Make it easier to know who's doing what
Staff / titles
There was a discussion on the mailing list about people's titles / staff positions. We seemed to come to a tentative agreement, but it was a bit uneasy. Maybe we should just hold off on any titles or positions for now -- so there's no "executive director," no "treasurer," etc. People will continue to be responsible for whatever needs doing (somebody has to do it) but we'll wait to discuss officers / staff positions until after we talk about the board of directors.
The areas of FC.o's activities that we discussed last week:
- Providing resources to campus groups
- Outreach / recruiting
- Networking (among campus groups and with outside organizations)
- Activism / lobbying
Research was the least disccused, and the only activity that we haven't yet attempted. It also raised some doubts: How much do people trust paid research from a group with a stated, non-academic objective? Would sponsoring research be a better use of funds than sponsoring art or software?
So, I (Gavin) propose that we drop "Research" as a separate category. There's no reason that we couldn't do research, should the occasion arise, as part of providing resources (like EFF White Papers), networking (collaborating with outside groups on research), or lobbying (research targeted at decision-makers). By dropping it as a separate category, we retain the flexibility to do research if we want to, but we're not obligated to do it because it's in our mission statement.
My proposal for the official activities of FC.o, to be later expanded into a mission statement:
- Resources for students
Assuming we come to a decision on the mission, we should now be able to return to the organizational structure discussion. Nelson and I think we can do this in two weeks. Here's the plan:
- After today's call, everyone will leave with a task: either to research the organizational structure of a certain group, to look over our past discussions of org structure and pull anything important, or to draft the proposal.
- Throughout the week, we'll share what we come up with, and talk about it.
- On the 2005-07-03 call, we'll summarize and discuss the proposal. We'll flag any parts of the proposal that need work, keeping whatever is acceptable.
- We'll revise the flagged parts and aim to make a final decision on 2005-07-10.
- From that point, we'll
- need to turn our decisions into by-laws
- need to populate whatever bodies we created (e.g. fill the seats of the board of directors).
Groups to research
Who might we look at for possible structure models?
- Debian Project
- Student Global AIDS Thingie
- LUGs / hobbyist groups
- Fraternal / service organizations (e.g. Lions, Elk, 4-H, Jaycees)
- College Democrats / Republicans, etc.
- Labor unions
Let the guests speak
Hopefully we haven't left the guests waiting too long, because at this point I would like:
- Jonathan Mendelson from CMU to talk about College Dems
- Jake Wachman from Stanford to talk about the Roosevelt institution
Possible Fall Programing
Jimbo (Jimmy Wales) proposed that he would be willing to travel around doing a freeculture speech tour. Basically in exchange for travel money and some minimal payement.
CC Happy Birthday Song
- Do we want to persue this matter any longer?
- If we do, then what should we do?