Explicit and formal statement of relationship btw Council and THATCamp (プライム)

[パトリック·マレー·ジョン]

There was long, helpful, in-depth discussion about both THATCamp in general and THATCamp Prime today. One thing that was clear to me was that to many it wasn’t clear whether Prime was ‘owned’ by the council, or RRCHNM, or some mix.

Our decide by consensus approach landed us on the council and Prime being separate. Should we formalize that by finding a place in the charter to state that explicitly in some form? Without a formal statement someplace, the consensus approach implicitly makes it possibly contingent on each council’s makeup, which I don’t think is a good thing.

そう, should we create language specifying that formally and make it an explicit vote? もしそうなら, is someplace in the charter the place for that (that’d be an awkward negative statement — Responsibilities NOT of the Council), but maybe that’s okay. Either way, I think it would be good to 1) say THATCamp Council isn’t a THATCamp organizing body and 2) make that more explicit somewhere.

[アマンダフレンチ]

Sure, I think that’d be a good idea. I say we put it in the Charter, perhaps near the top. I’ll draft something and make it clear that it’s a suggested change, and we can vote on it in August. 感謝, パトリック!

[アマンダフレンチ]

Suggested changes in the Google Doc, posted at at http://thatcamp.org/council

[パトリック·マレー·ジョン]

うーん….I’m not finding it on that page. Am I looking in the wrong place?

[筆者]

投稿