[globaloutlookDH-l] Terms of reference, redux

Øyvind Eide oyvind.eide at iln.uio.no
Wed Oct 17 02:06:52 MDT 2012

Dear all,

Sorry for having been a little slow on responding the last few days. 
Good work! I support the points below, with refinements suggested.

I assume that representation could be double for some people, e.g., 
representing one CO and one committee at the same time. We have a 
limited number of people willing to work on this, I guess.

I also believe that one of the first things to discuss is how to 
approach scholars in areas where we would like to see development. How 
do we address the need of institutions being to a degree "homegrown" 
with the fact that we propose things from other parts of the world?



On 10/16/2012 05:27 PM, Daniel O'Donnell wrote:
> Here is the state of play in terms of the GO::DH structure and terms of
> reference as I understand the discussion. If this seems reasonable, I
> could add it to the draft description I sent round and we could submit
> it to the ADHO Steering Committee for discussion.
> 1) The organisation is a Special Interest Group focussed on ensuring
> issues in the global participation in DH are part of our general
> discourse at ADHO and serving as a facilitator between ADHO, its
> committees, COs, and members and those communities that are not
> represented by ADHO in any significant fashion.
> 2) Tasks include advocacy, research, and facilitation. GO::DH is not a
> replacement or competitor for any ADHO committee: its goal is to act as
> a resource and prompt, rather than an executor.
> 3) There is no limit on general membership. The important thing is that
> you are interested in the issue(s).
> 4) The group is to be led by a small executive made up of people who are
> willing to take a more active role in proposing activities, interacting
> with ADHO, conducting research, and the like. Ideally this will involve
> people with interests in various parts of the globe.
> 5) Participation by ADHO COs and committees would be extremely welcome
> if this seems wise to them and the ADHO SC: two possibilities for this
> participation might be that each CO appoint a representative to the
> GO::DH executive, or, if a lighter footprint is desired, that the SC
> appoint a couple of representatives to act for all (my preference would
> be the first option, I think).
> 6) When it seems desirable or practical, the SIG would break into
> smaller working groups focussed on a particular region or problem.
> Currently there is probably enough interest and participation for a
> group on China, for example.
> I hope this is both accurate and the right combination of useful
> structure with minimal overhead and maximum flexibility. What do others
> think?
> -dan

More information about the globaloutlookdh-l mailing list