as I said, there might be no need, even by your
definition. It all depends
on the report and whether accepted by the board. So please do not act
hastely here and do not try to get everything done at once. Rome isn't biult
on one day either.
2008/3/17, Milos Rancic <millosh(a)gmail.com>om>:
On 3/17/08, effe iets anders <effeietsanders(a)gmail.com> wrote:
If you have a seperate body in place, such as the
VC, there might be no
need
for such requirement, as there would be another
way to control the
foundtaion more directly. We should not put these requirements in just
to
put them in, but only if they are useful.
Therefore, I think it is best
to
await the developments on the VC side. There
seems to be no hurry with
regards to the number of volunteers anyway?
Community control over WMF bodies is necessary whatever is number of
those bodies. If someone made bad decisions, they should be
responsible at the next elections. This is an extremely simple
principle of representative democracy. However, this is not
implemented coherently in the bylaws.
And this may be implemented in (at least) three ways: (1) To give the
right to the elected members to appoint and remove expert members, (2)
to limit powers and proportion of the appointed members or (3) to move
all expertize out of the Board, to payed professionals (I prefer this
option).
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: