This looks only superficially similar. It reads to me like “we’re afraid appointing a community panel will lead to problems associated with few people making decisions for many people, so we decided to keep going with even fewer people making decisions.”
And the actual appointed advisory board sounds (at least from the post) toothless, unclear in its responsibilities, and like the board can circumvent it by just deciding not to ask it about any particular topic.
A community ombudsman would have a clear responsibility of representing the community and being available to listen to complaints (as opposed to “maximising impact”, which is what the rest of CEA declares to be its goal), and should probably have voting power in some capacity.
FYI I think this was experimented with.
This looks only superficially similar. It reads to me like “we’re afraid appointing a community panel will lead to problems associated with few people making decisions for many people, so we decided to keep going with even fewer people making decisions.”
And the actual appointed advisory board sounds (at least from the post) toothless, unclear in its responsibilities, and like the board can circumvent it by just deciding not to ask it about any particular topic.
A community ombudsman would have a clear responsibility of representing the community and being available to listen to complaints (as opposed to “maximising impact”, which is what the rest of CEA declares to be its goal), and should probably have voting power in some capacity.