On Dec 16, 2007 10:21 PM, Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
Anthony wrote:
On Dec 16, 2007 10:01 PM, Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
I feel there are two paths for the future. Either we keep a board mostly made of community members (elected or appointed), who may not be top-notch professionals, who can do mistakes, such as forgetting to do a background check, such as not being able to do an audit in 1 week, such as not signing the killer-deal with Google, but who can breath and pee wikimedia projects, dedicate their full energy to a project they love, without trying to put their own interest in front. A decentralized organization where chapters will have more room, authority and leadership.
Or we get a board mostly made of big shots, famous, rich, or very skilled (all things potentially beneficial), but who just *do not get it*. A centralized organization, very powerful, but also very top-down.
If that's the only two possibilities, then you've already admitted defeat.
You may add some middle path solutions. But not so many I fear
Look, the background check thing is understandable, a big mistake, but an understandable one, although hiring a temp as COO maybe isn't. But if a board composed of community members can't ensure that someone or a team of someones is hired to produce regular financial statements which can be audited in under a month, then I don't think that board is acceptable. If you don't get that, then I don't think I have any hope left.
I think you're right on that there are a lot of big decisions ahead for the Foundation. But breath and pee and energy and love aren't going to be enough to put it down the right path.
I don't know. I'll have to sleep on it.