Difference between revisions of "Microgrant Process Review"
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
==Recommendations== | ==Recommendations== | ||
| − | + | Shalf's recommendation is to follow the best example he knows about such process: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_CH/Micro-Grant | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
===Why?=== | ===Why?=== | ||
Revision as of 18:13, 9 March 2017
(Work in Progress)
Microgrant Process Review is a short project started by Shalf in his role as Board Member to propose and implement improvements to this important internal tool we have as an association to support and nurture great stuff.
20170308 Creating page, starting collecting past conversations about it 20170309 Vote upon proposal below at the Board Meeting
Proposal
State of the Microgrant Process
Why?
How to apply
The process we used so far was as follow:
1 microgrants contact point for the community (@ana at the moment).
2. Upon receiving a request, this person immediately asks the whole board by email (using the board@hackuarium.com email address) and waits for 3 positive replies.
3. If 3 members of the board support the request, it is a green light.
4. If there are concerns within 48 hours, negative opinions, it gets discussed at the next board meeting (within a month).
How to review an application and vote
How to announce results and follow-up with members applying
List of granted projects (not people) with a link to the project description on the wiki
Recommendations
Shalf's recommendation is to follow the best example he knows about such process: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_CH/Micro-Grant
Why?
Projects that will benefit the community, supported by the community (partly)
How to apply
Communicate on Slack