Michael Snow wrote:
In the meantime, with or without a
non-disparagement agreement, board members still have a fiduciary
obligation to always act in the best interests of the organization.
What is actually the point of all of this legal posturing? Does the
Wikimedia Foundation seriously intend to ever sue a member of its Board
of Directors solely for saying disparaging things about it? Would that
*ever* be the right thing to do? I can think of very few cases where a
decision to do so would not itself be a breach of fiduciary duty,
basically sinking the organization by destroying its public goodwill and
donation stream. You can't really having a leading position in the
free-content movement and simultaneously pursue lawsuits that even
appear to be attempting to repress speech.
-Mark