I second Gnangarra 100%.
On a personal note, I'm very happy with the candidates elected, even if they do not fit 100% with my top (rather a 66% 😄), and wish them the best while fulfilling their mission, which certainly is no easy task.
I also believe it's worth noting that Victoria and Lorenzo, who were greatly associated with the Movement Chart BoT veto some months ago, were reelected by the community, despite many predictions that they would suffer a big backlash for making public their positions, and a number of people was quick to predict their certain removal from office, especially Victoria. It didn't happen, which opens space for reflecting if such positions were so much detached from the community ones as was said back then.
Best, Paulo
Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com escreveu (sexta, 11/10/2024 Ã (s) 15:20):
Congratulations to all those who were successful, thank you to those leaving the board, thank you for everything the unsuccessful candidates did in relation to the process, and special thanks for the functionaries who have spent the last 6 odd months managing this process.
IMHO diversity, and high edit counts are the least important characteristics for boards members, even ones selected to represent the community. I think the MCDC is a prime example of how trying to ensure every group has a say in the decision process is impractical. What we want is the best people and empower them to act.
What defines the best people we all have our own criteria, that's really subjective measurements the list of options is nearly endless.
Is it more than disappointment or that there are legitimate concerns over the capacity of those who were successful? Then contact those who ran the process directly with appropriately cited reasons before appointments are confirmed.
What I can say after 19 odd years of contributing is that the community is stronger than the Board and even The WMF, as long as the lights stay on and we just keep doing what we can one edit at a time it will be fine.
On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 at 21:18, Christophe Henner < christophe.henner@gmail.com> wrote:
Congratulations indeed!
@Phoebe Ayers phoebe.ayers@gmail.com from a quick glance at : https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_of_Trustees diversity still remains an issue, but appointed seats have carried the most diverse profile it seems. Which to be honest make sense as elections are usually a reflection of the composition of the movement.
That being said, and it's a much larger discussion, I also believe we're trying to achieve too many things with that one board. At the same time you need a set of "business" skill set as you're running a very very large and global organisation, we want community representativeness and Diversity in a broad sense. All of that in 12 seats. I would love us to set what is the most important and work from there. We never could and never will be able to strike a balance between those three things :)
-- Christophe
On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 at 13:30, phoebe ayers phoebe.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Congratulations to all the candidates, and thank you to everyone who ran and put a lot of time into the process. And thanks especially to our ongoing and outgoing trustees. The board is a ton of work, and one of the hardest jobs in our movement.
Re: processes, part of the idea, back in the day, for having two processes for the affiliate votes and the general vote was that it could help ensure geographical diversity (though I'm not sure that was true in practice). These two processes were combined a couple of years ago. I'm not sure going back to the old system is the right answer, but I do think it takes a variety of strategies to get candidates who both understand Wikimedia and the motivations of editors AND are interested in overseeing the governance of a multi-million dollar organization -- which is the job we are asking these folks to do.
Best, Phoebe (trustee 2010-2015)
On Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 05:49 Philip Kopetzky philip.kopetzky@gmail.com wrote:
Well, congratulations to 4 people living in Western Europe. If this result doesn't get the Wikimedia Foundation to rethink their approach to how they select their board members, I don't know what will.
I guess it's up to communities, affiliates and regional structures to create the change we want to see, noe more than ever.
On Fri, 11 Oct 2024, 11:38 Katie Chan, ktc@ktchan.info wrote:
*You can find translations of this message or help translate this message on Meta https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2024/Announcement/Results(short_version).*
Hello all,
Thank you to everyone who participated in the 2024 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2024. 6000 community members from more than 180 wiki projects have voted.
The following four candidates were the most voted:
- Christel Steigenberger
- Maciej Artur Nadzikiewicz
- Victoria Doronina
- Lorenzo Losa
While these candidates have been ranked through the vote, they still need to be appointed to the Board of Trustees. They need to pass a successful background check and meet the qualifications outlined in the Bylaws. New trustees will be appointed at the next Board meeting in December 2024.
Read the full announcement on Meta-Wiki https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2024/Announcement/Results(long_version)
Best regards,
The Elections Committee and Board Selection Working Group
-- Katie Chan Any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the view of any organisation the author is associated with or employed by.
Experience is a good school but the fees are high. - Heinrich Heine
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
-- Boodarwun Gnangarra 'ngany dabakarn koorliny arn boodjera dardon nlangan Nyungar koortabodjar'
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org