The bottom line is that, technically, code4lib does not, AKAIK, exist.
It's one piece of property, the domain name is in your name.
Everything else is donated or lent.
Code4lib has no formal governance. It is more like a clique than an
organization. The question of whether we want to adopt formal
organization and governance has been raised often over the years, and
it seems to be as effective in emptying rooms as craft beers are for
Since we don't exist, we can't do anything. We can collectively come
up with a policy, but we have no status to enforce that policy. Like a
clique, it really comes down to convincing everyone that you are a
cool kid, and you are committing to a policy, so everyone else who
wants to be cool should do so as well. This can work, except for the
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Ed Summers <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Mark A. Matienzo
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> More to the point, no other decision about code4lib in terms of
>> "action" or "policy" has been made ever. This is new territory for us.
> It's not really that new. We've voted on tshirts, logos, and whether
> or not to have jobs.code4lib.org post here--perhaps other things that
> I'm forgetting. I'm not saying we need to vote on the anti-harassment
> policy to make it real--it's already real. Not everyone may respect
> it, but hopefully we'll all continue being nice people and won't have
> to worry about enforcing it. It's hard to imagine anyone being against
> it. Personally, I find it regrettable that it's even necessary, but it
> is what it is.
> Voting can be a nice way of testing the waters for something. I found
> the survey on the jobs.code4lib.org email posting very helpful. But
> voting on everything would get very tedious, and boring very quickly I
> imagine. code4lib has always seemed much more freeform than that to
> me. I really liked Bethany's description of lazy consensus  at the
> last conference.
>  http://nowviskie.org/2012/lazy-consensus/
The Cherry Hill Company