Sue writes:
"Interesting thread, Itzik --- to be honest, I had forgotten that staff had
been granted the right to vote regardless of edit count. I wouldn't be surprised if the only staff members who do vote are those who would qualify under the edit count requirement anyway.
"Seems to me that rather than creating new exemptions from the edit count requirement, we might be better off to lower the number of edits required so that anybody who's demonstrated interest in the projects would qualify. If edits on meta, mediawiki, outreach, etc., qualify, and we were to lower the edit count requirement, then I think that would be inclusive of most/all contributors. Would something like that make sense?"
It makes sense to me. I think many thoughtful people recognize that the edit-count requirement is a fairly weak metric of engagement in the Wikimedia community. I also think the exemptions actually have reflected the same recognition -- that someone who is not a dedicated editor may be a committed and contributing member of the community in other ways than super-numerous recent edits.
That there should be some threshold of engagement I think is necessary to prevent capture of WMF board, but I'm not sure it needs to be as high as it is right now.
FWIW, when I was on staff I did not vote for WMF board positions, even though I could, because I thought it was important in the role I was playing to recuse myself from engagement in the elections. I don't think that reasoning would apply to all staff members, but it felt applicable in my particular case.
--Mike