Assistant Regional Coordinator Discussion View history

Revision as of 23:45, 19 October 2015 by Kentsmith9 (talk | contribs) (Changes so far per https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=338&t=161321)

Assistant Regional Coordinator (ARC) Role

Regional Coordinators (RCs) can assign one or more current Local Champ(s) (LC) to be their support person with the consent of the US Champs. The ARC's primary goal is to assist with the RC duties, including but not limited to, AM application requests and reviews. The level of duties assigned to the ARC is the sole discretion of the RC with collaboration of the ARC. The RC assumes full responsibility for the actions of the ARC when the ARC is working on behalf of the RC. If the RC steps down or is removed, the ARC does not automatically permanently replace the RC, but may be asked to perform some or all of the duties until the new RC is voted upon. The ARC may apply for the role, along with any other qualified applicant, following the process for electing an RC. Often, RCs consult with their local SMs, CMs and LCs for advice and the ARC would also use that same process as necessary.

An RC may choose to have a co-RC rather than an ARC. In that event, the person being nominated for co-RC would need to follow the full RC approval process. If the co-RC is already an RC in another area, then no further process is required. If the RC wants to promote the ARC to a full co-RC position, they would need to follow a full RC approval process. In either case, the initial RC is the primary RC for that area and has final say over any ARC or co-RC.

Responsibilities

  • Act as a shadow of the RC with final decisions and responsibility held by the RC.
  • Work closely with his/her RC and divide up responsibilities between each other as they desire, including but not limited to the following:
    • Process AM applications.
    • Direct communications with SMs.
    • Identify potential SMs and work with the RC to evaluate readiness.
    • Regional promotion suggestions to RC.
    • Block editors as required after receiving approval from the RC.
    • Focus on a particular state(s) in the region.
  • Act in a temporary role as the RC in the event the current RC steps down, until a new RC can be elected. The ARC may also apply to be considered for the RC role with other candidates.

ARC selection process

  • An ARC must be nominated by the respective RC. Other RC may make recommendations, but cannot select one for a region outside their appointment.
  • An announcement of the nomination should be posted in the US Champ forum including the following information:
    • A scope description of the activities the RC expects of the ARC.
    • A summary of why the RC thinks the nominee is a good/best choice for fulfilling the role.
    • A summary of local community input that the RC has already obtained, particularly among State Managers (SMs) for the region; links to related state/region forum posts are acceptable.
  • The "objection/discussion" must stay open for 7 days.
  • If there are no objections at the completion of this period, the nomination is approved with no further processing.
  • If there are objections, necessary discussions will be conducted in the US Champ forum and consensus must be established for each item of objection. Should this not be accomplished in the time period, the nomination would move to a vote requiring a simple majority (>50%) of US champs who vote in a 7 day period on that nominee. Failure to pass would require a new ARC nomination.
  • The nominee will have full access to comments in the US Champ forum to defend themselves from any objection.

ARC (or co-RC) removal process

  • The RC has the ultimate responsibility for the region. For that reason, the primary RC has the power to remove an ARC or co-RC from that region in any of the following events:
    • Going against the primary RC's word or orders without a proper forum discussion to support otherwise questionable situations.
    • The promotion of demotion of SMs or R5 editors without prior discussion or pre-approval with the RC.
    • Undermining the RCs authority of publicly shaming the RC for the benefit of the ARC or others.
    • Failure to support and follow the etiquette guidelines.