On Jun 13, 2006, at 12:01 PM, Brion Vibber wrote:
Michael R. Irwin wrote:
A bigger stacked Board micromanaging the community will leave us in the future right where we are now.
I'm curious.
What can the board and management (whatever its structure) *do* that will be better?
What are examples of things a hypothetically ideal management would do *right* that the present management is not?
Deal with marshaling assets and legal resources to deal with defamation litigation. Tackle the problem of how to effectively avoid such litigation.
Fred
I suspect this would be a much more productive discussion than constantly claiming the board is "stacked" -- which of course it is, intentionally and openly so. There's not necessarily anything wrong with that; this isn't a democracy, it's a business (even if a non-profit one) and the board's job is not to represent the users, it's to ensure that the company implements its goals (as stated in the bylaws).
If there's something that management needs to *do* which will actually be better served by a new management structure or new board members, then by all means let's talk about it, but let's not put the cart before the horse.
What first, then how.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l