While we're weighing in, I'd like to support Erik Moeller's candidacy. Though I don't agree with him on all specifics, I trust that he's sincerely and idealistically committed to the core mission of the Wikimedia Foundation. As importantly, he has a long track record of getting important things done, being the primary mover behind getting both the Wikimedia Commons and WikiNews up and running. Both involved complex combinations of leadership, policy development, and community support, and have turned out to be our two most successful recent projects.
From the point of view of relations with overlapping communities, he has significant credibility with the broader open-content community. He's been active for many years in a variety of forums (I first ran across him at kuro5hin, and he ran a well-known copyright-reform blog for years), and his work with the Wikimedia Commons in particular has made him known in open-media circles. So having him on the board would help cement our alliances with the wider group of people who have similar aims.
There are a number of other candidates who I think would make good board members, but Erik stands out as having a proven track record of getting complex but important things done, along with a high level of credibility in a wider community.
-Mark
I definitely agree with you, Delirium. But I am not a big fan of blatantly endorsing candidates on the mailing list.
On 9/17/06, Delirium delirium@hackish.org wrote:
While we're weighing in, I'd like to support Erik Moeller's candidacy. Though I don't agree with him on all specifics, I trust that he's sincerely and idealistically committed to the core mission of the Wikimedia Foundation. As importantly, he has a long track record of getting important things done, being the primary mover behind getting both the Wikimedia Commons and WikiNews up and running. Both involved complex combinations of leadership, policy development, and community support, and have turned out to be our two most successful recent projects.
From the point of view of relations with overlapping communities, he has significant credibility with the broader open-content community. He's been active for many years in a variety of forums (I first ran across him at kuro5hin, and he ran a well-known copyright-reform blog for years), and his work with the Wikimedia Commons in particular has made him known in open-media circles. So having him on the board would help cement our alliances with the wider group of people who have similar aims.
There are a number of other candidates who I think would make good board members, but Erik stands out as having a proven track record of getting complex but important things done, along with a high level of credibility in a wider community.
-Mark
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
James Hare wrote:
I definitely agree with you, Delirium. But I am not a big fan of blatantly endorsing candidates on the mailing list.
To tell the truth I'm not either, which is why I sent this nearly at the end of voting rather than a few weeks ago when voting opened. But since people were throwing out their opinions already, I figured that the cat's out of the bag and we might as well all add in our views (although hopefully people will avoid disendorsements, since that can become acrimonious).
It might be worth deciding whether we want to follow any more organized endorsement process in future elections (or avoid endorsements altogether).
-Mark
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org