phoebe ayers wrote:
As you all know, I am all in favor of professionalism,
but I am also
in favor of knowing what's going on, and I think we all greatly value
the sense that our ideas and work as community members might have an
impact in making decisions like this.
Hi Phoebe, etc.
Answers to some of the questions that have been raised, below.......
- Why wasn't the position advertised?
It's completely normal, in some circumstances, to not advertise. In this
instance, the job requirements were pretty specific: I was looking for a
longtime community member, ideally with a good understanding of the
organization's history and how it works today, and with good
relationships in the free culture movement. Someone who is solid
technically. Who is willing and able to relocate to San Francisco.
Ideally with experience living or working outside North America, and
with languages other than English.
There is not a long list of people who fit those requirements, and my
feeling was that I likely wouldn't surface any through advertising: if
they existed, I almost certainly already knew about them.
- Why wasn't this whole process more public/inclusive?
I respect the position of the community members who want transparency
and openness. But transparency is always tough when it comes to
individual staffing issues. In this instance, I planned to hire a
deputy only_if_ I could find someone who fit the requirements I named
above. Since I was clearly not going to publicly evaluate individual
candidates, I don't think a public process would've been all that useful.
- Is it a good idea for someone to shift from staff to board, or vice
versa, with no waiting period?
This has been discussed a fair bit by the board and the community, and
the board has not put in place any restrictions around such movements.
I think the organization has not yet gotten to consensus, and it's
possible that the harm -in restricting access to the tiny pool of people
with Wikimedia organizational experience- might in fact outweigh the
good. Regardless - there is no requirement for a waiting period, and I
see no particular argument for one in this instance.
- Has Erik resigned from his other commitments?
Yes, Erik has resigned from the board and from his role as CTO of Open
- Is Erik legally able to work in the United States?
- Did Erik recuse himself from the board vote on Sue as ED because she
had already offered him the deputy job?
Yes, at that point we were talking about the deputy role, and that's why
Erik recused himself.
- Is there a formal job description?
Yes, attached. Because it's a new position, it will likely not play out
exactly as detailed here, but this is a snapshot of what we imagine, at
this moment, the job will look like.