Thank you for sharing the link to the recording, unfortunately I could not follow it live.
I am reassured by the open approach and speed taken to transparently address the issue and hope that the commitments promised will be followed through. With the high turnover at the WMF and many leadership positions still to be filled, this was an encouraging signal.
I did not want to come in earlier, as I believe the perception and what is expected of a major and mature organisation was well described by others.
I only want to draw attention to one point in the interest of our growing or future affiliates in that the examples brought forward from affiliate policies enforced by the WMF all concerned mature organisations with an established separation of staff and board roles (can't be sure, but I don't believe this was a policy systematically promoted to affiliates). Some smaller affiliates might find themselves in the position where a given board member might be putting in the 30 hours a week as a volunteer, and when it comes to hiring the first employee, the choice is between giving this "unicorn" board member a chance (provided the position is advertised, s/he is properly recused and qualified) or getting an outsider on-boarded probably by the same board member who was already working 30 hours a week for free and who might be asked to continue to do so.
(There's already a lot on this topic on Meta which is a bit off topic in this thread, and just my short hypothetical example here raises a myriad assumptions or side discussions on the right approach to take -- the point is that our movement is more varied than has been represented in the few posts on the mailing list here and any future harmonisation in this area should keep this diversity and Dariusz' perspective at the
end of the recording in mind in our efforts to setting up a movement wide minimum standard on the experience of this oversight at our supposedly most mature organisation.)
Best regards,
Bence