I think this is dancing around the perceived problem. You can either have open, democratic, and fair elections with a result that represents the will of the electorate, or you can have a group of people who are diverse in terms of nationality, gender, ethnicity, etcetera. Not both. And I don't think that tinkering with the formula for election and board composition is really going to do anything to address that.
Seeing the candidates that stood, I think that the real problem is the lack of female candidates for us to elect. And that is a cultural problem, exacerbated by the fact that unfortunately Wikimedia projects can be quite a hostile place for women, and understandably many women don't want to make themselves targets for harassment. Once there is a more even number of men and women running, I think that this particular problem will take care of itself.
Cheers, Craig
On 7 June 2015 at 04:58, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
I'm happy with S/N/O and with the election winners, but concerned about the diversity of the Board. I wonder if rethinking the entire board structure is in order, for example we could have:
- One seat per continent, elected by the whole voting community
- Two affiliate seats chosen by all affiliates including user groups.
- Two appointed seats with non-renewable terms.
Thoughts?
Pine _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe