How are decisions made? What decisions do owners make vs operational staff?

This thread is to discuss the ongoing project to bring the community on as part owners of Glimesh, make sure you check out the original thread before contributing to this conversation!

Likely we’ll need some kind of regular meetings where members can discuss / vote on various aspects of the business direction. Where’s the line between the board, the membership, and the operational team.

Board Members - Making proposals for the members to vote on. This team should be guided by or have representatives they can liase with directly from the core glimesh teams e.g. devs, community team, marketing that they may advise any potential pitfalls/issues with what they are to suggest - including whether the coding is actually possible at all, timescales, financial costs - would fundraising need to happen to make that view happen, wider considerations such as moderation etc. This board should be guided by the community as a whole and well as Glimesh in terms of how things should develop acting in the wider interests of the communitys wants/needs, while also ensuring Glimesh remains true.

Membership - Allowing people to have a vote on any proposals the Board put forward. Having a threshold of ‘x’ votes needed in order for a proposal from the Board to go ahead. This membership level should comprise of anyone on the platform who wants to be part of it. If a proposal fails at this stage, the board to seek to understand why - is it just they dont like the idea or is it due to a lack of understanding, if it is the latter the proposal could go back to the board to rework and repropose. Members should be able to lobby any ideas to bring to the boards attention for discussion.

Operational Team - These would need to feed into the board when proposals are being put forward, either by representatives on the Boards or feeding into the Board to advise as laid about above. Ops teams may also be members and board, these things don’t need to be mutually exclusive there should be the same rights open to them as anyone else unless there is an intention to have Ops Teams benefit in a different way thus allowing them to just offer up an advisory role to the members and board.

I see no reason why these teams can’t be fluid. Board could be elected from members (and non members) alike with people moving between these after a set “term”.

One example of this kind of model in action is my local town. The local council authority has a team set up which helps manage and develop businesses in the town. All independent businesses are members by default, as businesses we elect a yearly board, anyone from the members can stand for the board and a vote takes place. A futher vote also takes place for who should head up the board and that team sits for the year. They hold regular meetings and less formal events such as coffee mornings with the members in order to listen to concerns, find out their thoughts for the town etc. The board itself works alongside the council (in our case the core glimesh teams) to build proposals, ideas, discuss costs and implications of anything involved. We trust our board to represent the best of us and they listen to us and keep us informed via regular updates, emails, and an open dialgoue with the board head. This has been a very effective model in my finding, bad Board leads never see re-election, and good ones get re-elected (our current lead has been in charge for 3 terms, it used to be that they couldn’t stand for 2 years after standing for 1, but he’s been such an overwhelming success the members lobbied for this to change and the board decided it was best for the businesses - one of the best examples of how change was lobbied through members and then put to the board, rather than the other way around). Through this membership there’s also help for new businesses with additional support and lil pots of funding for things like signage etc (not something I think Glimesh would need in this sense but a consideration for how such things may work) there’s also support in a more Events team sense in that if Businesses are holding an event they are able to get advertised on the official social media pages and so on. Businesses can lobby ideas through the board for the board to work out the finer details and vote on, and connect and work alongside one another with a common goal in mind - to help create a better town for everyone.

While this isn’t a working model of a co-operative as such, what we do share is a more prosperous town, and businesses which are supported and feel listened too. Something like this model above I feel would work for Glimesh well, its about listening, cooperating and ensuring the best for both the town and the local businesses (in this instance for Glimesh and the streamers). With all levels working together feeding into eachother fluidly backward and foward to help ensure the best for everyone.


See my reply here: as I feel board members and membership is completely different than what has been said by Berri. I feel it would go Membership, Operational Team, and Board Members.

I envision this new group doing things like setting the next phase of the roadmap. members could/should make a motion to solicit feedback from the global userbase, but ultimately this group would be the ones setting the roadmap items, based on that feedback.

This group could also vote to use company funds(up to a set limit) to ex. pay clone so he can dedicate time to work on a certain roadmap feature(cough RTMP cough), or to hire a marketing/PR consultant for a campaign, or get a lawyer for a legal matter


I see this similarly to how Berri put it with a Board (made up of community members, operational staff, devs etc.) Members of the company (I see a co-op working perfectly for what Glimesh wishes to achieve with allowing people to become owners of the company) and then an Operational Team to help advise the board on whether or not said proposals would be viable, and help them in determining timescales etc…

I would see the board putting together the roadmap, and then making proposals for members to vote on. I also like you do foresee the board having access to X amount of funding per month to be used or not used in implementing features/marketing etc…

I think the key here is communication and there are two important vectors: suggestions and proposals. Suggestions can come from anyone in the community and can be adopted by the voting membership to be transformed into a proposal.

In my mind, the ideal person to make a proposal to the community is the one who is going to do the work proposed. That person should also be on point to deliver regular status updates to the community in a standardized format (to be determined) including if the proposal is stalled and/or cannot be completed. It’s up to the voting membership to decide if the proposal fits Glimesh’s ethos and finances.

The operational staff would have authority to make certain decisions without needing a proposal that preserve the site – ie. A server is malfunctioning, investigating a security breach, or mitigating a DDOS in progress, etc. For everything else (including performance improvements/cost savings) they’d go through the normal proposal process.

Ultimately, the person making the proposal has all the accountability associated with it. That way, we don’t really need multiple groups of people weighing in – if you are not the one carrying the ball, then you are voting on it and are entitled to status updates on it.


I like a lot of what was said here.

What makes sense to me is:

Solicit suggested changes/updates from the general user base.

Allow voting on the list of suggested changes/updates from general user base/ownership group.

Take the top X number of suggestions (10 seems like a good number). Maybe allow a wildcard or two if the operational staff/board feel strongly on a suggestion that didn’t make the top 10.

Operational staff lead vetting out the suggestions for viability/cost.

The board votes on the final options/makes a decision on which/how many can be tackled during that time period, taking into consideration other projects underway and using any available budget.

On the operational side there should be some sort of project oversight/project manager to help keep projects on track and on budget and oversee the work being done.

1 Like