I'm sorry not to agree totally with you, but I think there's a misunderstanding too. I cannot explain which (headache doesn't help), but there's.
You said: 4 of 7 members, 5 of 7 members. Nice, but that's not 7 of 7, and I think this is the first problem. I really appreciate the contribution of Jan-Bart and Michael, but they are "outsiders" (as you described them), and I cannot understand why "outsiders" should be part of a board, then. They could be "outsider helps".
Going on. Jimbo is more simbolic. Yet he's *very* important and he *must* be part of the Board, as far as I think. But he's not that representative of... for example, Chinese Community or European Community. This makes 4 members remaining.
Four members for *a lot* of editors. Quite few, proportionally. Local communities are not represented: what about spanish community? what about italian, or polish, or south-african community? Don't get it as an offense or an attact, but I don't think you represent me. I've no way to interact with you, to express my opinion. I quite don't even know you.
I think there's a problem in the way the Foundation is organized: we are *big*, and we should start to think bigger. What does this means? For example, more voice to local chapters, intended as an intermidiate organism between Foundation and local communities...