[arg_discuss] ARG SIG Draft Constitution

[Brian Clark]

So I'm vomiting feedback here, perhaps as a way of getting a dialog going,
but I'm not particularly passionate about any of these positions. Viva la
"MEH!"

1. This proposed constitution essentially has:

	Committee Members appoint new Committee Members
	Committee Members elect Executive Members
	Executive Members (2) can act in the stead of the Committee


>From my personal experience, that works fine with small organizations where

the Committee exists primarily as a group of catalysts, but can present
intrinsic problems that feel cliquish as the organization grows. In essence,
it means the membership of the SIG has no real role in the management of the
SIG and, in worse case scenario, might end up existing simply as the voting
body to appoint a "strong executive trio".

2. Similarly, the structure suggested is kinda divorced from the goals
articulated. I tend to favor organization structures that grow from
responsibility instead of authority. To illustrate, what if there were
standing committees that anyone could join that were tasked with particular
duties, and the organizing committee was in essence the chairs of each of
those committees?

3. As articulated, committee membership looks like it is "for life" -- if
you actually dropped dead for not apologizing for missing three meetings :)

4. I realize the "Caveat Lector" is meant tongue in cheek, but since that
means "reader beware" it seems to imply that the committee or executives are
free to disregard the constitution (or worse, "self-destruct it") if they
find it expedient to do so.

That said, my personal perception is that the SIG remains nascent primarily
because it hasn't really committed itself to doing much more than chewing
the fat or serving as a platform for canonizing individual's efforts, rather
than because it lacks some system for governance. Until there is actually
something to "govern," is this level of structure really needed ... or, to
further mix Andrea's mixed metaphor, do we need to make sure the trains run
on time if we haven't invented trains yet?


Brian

-----Original Message-----
From: arg_discuss-bounces at igda.org [mailto:arg_discuss-bounces at igda.org] On
Behalf Of Andrea Phillips
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 2:24 PM
To: Discussion list of the IGDA ARG SIG
Subject: [arg_discuss] ARG SIG Draft Constitution

Hello, friends and SIG members,

Given Adam's decision to step down from the SIG leadership, I feel
like it's time that we formalize the leadership and governing
principles of the SIG a little better. For one thing, I'd really like
for everybody feel like they have a stake in how the SIG is run and
what its fate is; and if we have more hands on deck, maybe the trains
will run on time around here. (Mea culpa!). (And forgive my mixed
metaphors.)

That said, I've cribbed heavily from the Writers SIG and drafted an
ARG SIG Constitution:
http://www.igda.org/wiki/Alternate_Reality_Games_SIG/Constitution

I figure we should take about two weeks to look at it and respond;
based on feedback I (or you!) can make revisions to this Constitution,
and then I'll find a way to set up a poll for us to vote on it
anonymously to ratify. This may actually require a lot of discussion;
for one thing, the Writers SIG is a lot bigger and more vocal than
ours, so we might want only a single Executive (I already made the
minimum goal Committee size smaller).

I also plan to set up a chat session on the topic in about a week's
time -- but I'm not sure what would be the most convenient day and
time for the majority of SIG participants. If you've got anything to
say on that, please speak up.

Annnnnd have a lovely weekend, everybody. :)

-- 
Andrea Phillips
http://www.deusexmachinatio.com
Words * Culture * Interaction
_______________________________________________
ARG_Discuss mailing list
ARG_Discuss at igda.org
http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arg_discuss