On 3 Mar 2016, at 6:22 PM, Erik Moeller
To discuss which practices to adopt, it's worth first looking at the
existing Board manual, which is a remarkably detailed document that
goes into many of these issues including the exact process for minutes
publication, what types of information is captured in minutes, and so
As for minutes, again, it seems to me a matter of
possibly in the Board manual, what level of detail is appropriate. It
seems to me that the Board is adhering to a relatively risk-averse,
conservative approach right now, whereas WMF staff (which make many
risky and potentially sensitive decisions on a day-to-day basis)
capture significantly more individual-level detail in quarterly review
minutes without apparent ill effect. I understand the concern about
"speaking freely", but I personally think this is overstated in many
I think the issue, aside from the extreme tardiness of the meeting minutes (really, the
Board needs 3 weeks to publish the minutes and apparently has been late even then?!?) is
that the level of details is ridiculous. The meeting minutes for the last Board meeting
look like they were written on the back of an envelope, then typed into the wiki. And it’s
missing that there was any discussion at all about the removal of one of the Board
members, or that they asked James to leave the meeting immediately after the vote.
I think the Board’s Secretary needs to step in to answer this question. Why is there
missing actions in the minutes? Why aren’t the minutes complete? The Secretary is
responsible for minutes, so let’s hear from him why the minutes aren’t up to date.
Would someone please ask Geoff Brigham to come onto the list to explain this please? And
also explain why it takes so long to prepare these minutes and have them signed off?