[MEI-L] Proposals MEI Strategy Development Group
Benjamin Wolff Bohl
bohl at edirom.de
Thu Apr 10 12:40:36 CEST 2014
Dear all,
thanks for starting discussion on the proposals!
For some short replies and digest of the comments in the googleDoc:
The Guidelines definitely are the most important product of MEI,
together with the schema. An it sounds wise not to overload the
production of these documents with organizational / bureaucratic
matters. I think this is something everybody should keep in mind ;-)
Institutional Membership seems to have a lot of potential discussion.
her e are some questions to help us get clear what MEI wants:
- 1) A general question that could be raised in this context is whether
the idea of Institutional Membership should be an issue not tied to a
specific model but of general interest for MEI and thus any future model
of its organization?
- 2) Designating three levels of Institutional Membership with
respective increase of fees should result in more than just a label.
This only motivates to support with the lowest membership and even if
wanted it might get hard to argue to spend more money if it doesn't
bring more benefits.
- 3) Should Institutional Members (of any level or just highest level)
have a seat in the Board? Should these be allowed the right to vote or not
- 4) If institutional Memberships allow for a voting seat in the Board,
how avoid the risk of buying control over MEI?
- 5) Why not tie the fees for Institutional Membership to the size of
the institution an d their annual budget?
> Model C, while innovative, feels like it's imposing a structure to
> interest groups that should just happen naturally. I see this as being
> ultimately counterproductive, partly because it's kind of predictable
> that one or two groups will always have the bigger cut, simply because
> of what MEI offers.
I'm not sure what you mean with "such things". The general statements
concerning Interest Groups impose the structure to them. The idea of
Model C in this context is that in contrary to having exclusively Board
members form the groups with the "bigger cut" it allows smaller groups
to participate in the Board, not least because the ratios for sending
group members to the Board is in favour of smaller groups.
Best wishes,
Benjamin
***********************************************************
Musikwissenschaftliches Seminar Detmold/Paderborn
BMBF-Projekt "Freischütz Digital"
Benjamin Wolff Bohl
Gartenstraße 20
D--32756 Detmold
Tel. +49 (0) 5231 / 975-669
Fax: +49 (0) 5231 / 975-668
E-Mail: bohl at edirom.de
http://www.freischuetz-digital.de
***********************************************************
Am 09.04.2014 01:57, schrieb Raffaele Viglianti:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Many thanks to the Strategy Development Group - you all clearly put a
> lot of effort into producing a well organized and clear document.
>
> I left a few specific comments on the document itself. In general, I
> prefer Model B: it's lean and reflects well the size of the community.
> It also keeps the focus on the Guidelines and releases, which I agree
> with Sigfrid are the most important product of this community. I feel
> model B will allows us to move forward without having to jump through
> too many administrative hoops, while tasking people with essential
> admin responsibilities. The idea of institutional sponsorship from
> Model A is good, though it might need some clearer bylaws. Model C,
> while innovative, feels like it's imposing a structure to interest
> groups that should just happen naturally. I see this as being
> ultimately counterproductive, partly because it's kind of predictable
> that one or two groups will always have the bigger cut, simply because
> of what MEI offers.
>
> Thanks again for all you work!
> Raff
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 6:31 AM, Sigfrid Lundberg <slu at kb.dk
> <mailto:slu at kb.dk>> wrote:
>
> Hi Benjamin and all other contributors to the strategy document!
>
> Thanks for good work!
>
> I have to say that I'm leaning towards the A alternative, or
> something close to it. The reason for that is that the MEI
> guidelines is our most important product (and I suppose that it
> will be so for years to come). Hence I think that the technical
> committee is needed as the maintainer of that document and as an
> entity that assumes the responsibility for its development. I'm
> not sure the board should have that responsibility. There are
> people who have the capacities needed for work both in a board and
> being a guideline editor, but perhaps not simultaneously?
>
> A gambit for a discussion from between an XML query and a transform.
>
> Yours,
>
> Sigfrid
>
> ________________________________________
> Fra: mei-l [mei-l-bounces at lists.uni-paderborn.de
> <mailto:mei-l-bounces at lists.uni-paderborn.de>] på vegne af
> Benjamin Wolff Bohl [bohl at edirom.de <mailto:bohl at edirom.de>]
> Sendt: 2. april 2014 15:13
> Til: Music Encoding Initiative
> Emne: [MEI-L] Proposals MEI Strategy Development Group
>
> Dear MEI-L,
>
> after Music Encoding Conference 2013 MEI Strategy Development Group
> (MEI-Strat) was formed in order to elaborate proposals for future
> organization of MEI community. During the past months we have been
> working in order to start discussion on potential future forms of
> organizing MEI community.
>
> Now with the Music Encoding Conference 2014 being just around the
> corner
> it seems appropriate to start discussion on this subject matter, as we
> hope to distil a common community consensus on what might be new and
> openly communicated structures of MEI. Furthermore we intend to
> prepare
> presenations and a basis for further discussion for this year's
> conference (May 20-23 in Charlottesville, VA).
>
> ==A short disclaimer==
> Please be aware that anything in the proposal is indicative and
> subject
> to discussion, be it the individual proposals in general, or specific
> details, e.g. the length of terms for elected members.
>
> ==Words of thank==
> We thank the MEI community for the possibility to work on this subject
> matter, and for the confidence in our group!
> I personally like to thank all collaborators for their time,
> effort and
> good thoughts all of which were provided on expense of their private
> free time!
>
> ==The Discussion==
> The document containing our proposals is openly available online via
> google-Drive (no login required). Although modification of the text is
> not possible comments may be inserted by anyone with the link.
> Feel free
> to provide your identity when commenting or just submit anonymously.
> Of course it is not intended to discuss all raised topics in the
> document. A lively discussion on MEI-L would be warmly welcome so
> bring
> anything of interest to discussion there!
>
> ==The Document==
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IBvbKFM1fo4lwyFnIYnneUhfwTj4DLrAmtCSUfqzeQs/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
> With many thanks to all collaborators,
> for the MEI Strategy Development Group,
> Benajmin W. Bohl
> - Keeper
>
> --
> ***********************************************************
> Musikwissenschaftliches Seminar Detmold/Paderborn
> BMBF-Projekt "Freischütz Digital"
> Benjamin Wolff Bohl
> Gartenstraße 20
> D--32756 Detmold
>
> Tel. +49 (0) 5231 / 975-669
> <tel:%2B49%20%280%29%205231%20%2F%20975-669>
> Fax: +49 (0) 5231 / 975-668
> <tel:%2B49%20%280%29%205231%20%2F%20975-668>
> E-Mail: bohl at edirom.de <mailto:bohl at edirom.de>
>
> http://www.freischuetz-digital.de
> ***********************************************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mei-l mailing list
> mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de <mailto:mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de>
> https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> mei-l mailing list
> mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de <mailto:mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de>
> https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mei-l mailing list
> mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de
> https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l
-------------- n?chster Teil --------------
Ein Dateianhang mit HTML-Daten wurde abgetrennt...
URL: <http://lists.uni-paderborn.de/pipermail/mei-l/attachments/20140410/7a10d45b/attachment.html>
More information about the mei-l
mailing list