On 29 Dec 2015, at 13:19, Todd Allen
<toddmallen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
It's more complex if they've acted illegally, certainly. Under the law
they're citing, it looks like they have. Since community directors are
elected by a "class" (editors meeting the eligibility requirements), the
law states removal would be possible only by that class, one would presume
by referendum in this case.
I think we need to know if the Board considered this requirement.
On Dec 29, 2015 5:33 AM, "Gerard Meijssen" <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hoi,
<grin> it is a great shitstorm</grin> Do remember that a community chosen
representative voted the other community chosen representative out. It is
not a case of he must be good, the others are bad. It is more complicated.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 29 December 2015 at 13:19, Gnangarra
<gnangarra(a)gmail.com> wrote:
there are bigger questions than why like;
- how can this take place
- how can the community ensure its representatives independence in the
future,
- what effect will this have on other elected representatives on the
board
The Florida statute(
https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/617.0808 ) referred
to earlier says that If a director is elected by a class, chapter, or
other
organizational unit, or by region or other
geographic grouping, the
director may be removed only by the members of that class, chapter, unit,
or grouping. Do they even have ability to remove the person in the first
place given the action of the board why are they also determining the
next
steps in the replacing our representative.
Gn.
> On 29 December 2015 at 19:53, Thomas Goldammer <thogol(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2015-12-29 10:15 GMT+01:00 Isarra Yos <zhorishna(a)gmail.com>om>:
>
>
>> It says a lot, but just what that is depends entirely on the context.
And
>> for community members who voted for him, that context could mean we
> should
>> also no longer have confidence in him elsewhere in the projects, or
in
> the
>> board, or have no bearing on either thing whatsoever. Not knowing
just
>> means there's no indication what to
trust.
>
>
> I'd rather lose the trust and confidence in those 8 Board members than
in
> him without knowing what was the cause for
his disbarment. ;)
>
> Maybe the Board by-laws have to be changed, too. Throwing out a
> community-elected member like this, without providing a reason, is no
way
> to deal with the community who elected this
member. It should be
mandatory
> that the Board provides reasons together with the announcement to avoid
> exactly this kind of discussions and speculations, not a day (or more)
> later.
>
> And as for no-cause disbarments for community-elected members in a
> community-driven environment - uhm... I don't need to delve into that,
> everyone can see the problem. The Board should just not be allowed to
> disbar community-elected members without a cause, as that undermines
the
> authority of the community over those seats
on the Board.
>
> Th.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: