Re: [Foundation-l] Agenda for October board meeting

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

older

[Foundation-l] End Result is...

[Foundation-l] NYT: Who owns the...

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen

1 Oct 2008 1 Oct '08

2:20 a.m.

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:

...

Florence Devouard wrote: > Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote: > >> Florence Devouard wrote: >> >> >> >>> Staff >>> Related topic. Part of the job of the board is to set into place a >>> management (the ED), and then to regularly evaluate the job of the >>> management. Of course, such an evaluation can only be honestly done when >>> the management is given a collection of measurable goals to reach. When >>> I quit the board, Sue had been there for a year. >>> >> Since no-one other than me has stood up to clarify the above, >> purely in the interests of leaving nobody on this list with an >> incorrect impression of the way things went about the board >> of trustees (even if they joined this list very lately); let us all be >> very clear that Florence Devouard never resigned from the >> board (despite her very confusing use of the word "quit" above). >> >> What Florence Devouard did do was to refrain from contesting >> the election, and putting herself forward for evaluation by the >> community as to whether she deserved to serve on the board >> another term. While it is sad that *her* performance was not >> judged by the community in this manner, we can merely speculate >> what its outcome would have been. >> >> But let us be very clear. Florence did not quit. She declined >> the opportunity to be evaluated for her job performance by >> the community. For whatever reason. >> >> >> Yours, >> >> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen >> > > Are you upset because I did not give you the chance to vote for me ? ;-) >

You may not believe me, but yes, I was, at the time, quite a bit. I really wanted you to run on a platform that I could have endorsed. In fact that was what I waited for. And since you did not, decided in the end to run myself. And was duely evaluated as wanting, by the electorate ;-) It is true on the other side of the coin to say that I feared that you would run on a platform that I would have no choice than to oppose. I think you don't appreciate enough how in the dark ordinary members of the community (such as myself) are as to where each board member falls on each issue. This is the dark side of the current lack of transparency. Yours, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen

Show replies by date

Thomas Dalton

1 Oct 1 Oct

2:28 a.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Agenda for October board meeting

...

I think you don't appreciate enough how in the dark ordinary members of the community (such as myself) are as to where each board member falls on each issue. This is the dark side of the current lack of transparency.

I share your concerns there - I would very much like to know the views of individual board members (particularly the community elected ones). The individual votes on resolutions are sometimes included in the minutes, but that usually just shows that everyone accepted the final compromise. More detailed minutes would be much appreciated (perhaps that could be implemented if a member of staff is used to minute meetings rather than a board member trying to write things down while being involved in the discussion - I've minuted meetings myself, I know how hard it can be).

Florence Devouard

10:56 a.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Agenda for October board meeting

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:

...

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:

Florence Devouard wrote: > Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote: > >> Florence Devouard wrote: >> >> >> >>> Staff >>> Related topic. Part of the job of the board is to set into place a >>> management (the ED), and then to regularly evaluate the job of the >>> management. Of course, such an evaluation can only be honestly done when >>> the management is given a collection of measurable goals to reach. When >>> I quit the board, Sue had been there for a year. >>> >> Since no-one other than me has stood up to clarify the above, >> purely in the interests of leaving nobody on this list with an >> incorrect impression of the way things went about the board >> of trustees (even if they joined this list very lately); let us all be >> very clear that Florence Devouard never resigned from the >> board (despite her very confusing use of the word "quit" above). >> >> What Florence Devouard did do was to refrain from contesting >> the election, and putting herself forward for evaluation by the >> community as to whether she deserved to serve on the board >> another term. While it is sad that *her* performance was not >> judged by the community in this manner, we can merely speculate >> what its outcome would have been. >> >> But let us be very clear. Florence did not quit. She declined >> the opportunity to be evaluated for her job performance by >> the community. For whatever reason. >> >> >> Yours, >> >> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen >> > Are you upset because I did not give you the chance to vote for me ? ;-) >

I actually second you on this. The latest elections were much better organized than the previous ones in that regard. The system of Q&A made it much clearer what each candidate opinion was and limited the pitfall of personal attacks and bickering on the candidate talk page. A couple of days ago, John wrote an email regarding technical strategy and made reference to two statements I made several months ago. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Update_of_Foundation_organization_(Marc… and http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/10_wishes_for_2008 I think your concern will not improve. After I sent my "10 wishes for 2008", where I tried to outline what was important to me, what I intended to truely put my own energy on, I was told that individual board members should not express such public personal opinions. That such documents should only be the result of a carefully brainstormed time between all board board members and management. That board members should thrive to always appear in agreement, and in particular always supportive of any acts of the management. In short, learn to disagree in silence or quit. Whilst there are obviously huge benefits to this positionning, that's simply not something I can live with. I am fine being criticized for giving once my own position. But not fine when it becomes a habit and the default situation. It may be perfect in the corporate world, but I do not think that's the right choice for Wikimedia. As such, I am better out than in :-) Note that it does not mean the current board and staff do a bad job. I think they do overall a good job, some do an excellent job. But 40 years old is a good time to ponder on what one is happy to cope with, and not, and act accordingly. I still more or less know what each board member position is on "issues", but I'll soon join you on the dark side of the ignorants ;-)

John at Darkstar

11:15 a.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Agenda for October board meeting

...

A couple of days ago, John wrote an email regarding technical strategy and made reference to two statements I made several months ago. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Update_of_Foundation_organization_(Marc… and http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/10_wishes_for_2008 I think your concern will not improve. After I sent my "10 wishes for 2008", where I tried to outline what was important to me, what I intended to truely put my own energy on, I was told that individual board members should not express such public personal opinions. That such documents should only be the result of a carefully brainstormed time between all board board members and management. That board members should thrive to always appear in agreement, and in particular always supportive of any acts of the management. In short, learn to disagree in silence or quit.

I'm not very well-known for my delicate handling of political hot issues, so I have no problem with pointing out that this is a huge unsolved issue. I guess its not that fun for people to see such questions about issues they themselves should have solved, but anyhow it has to be done. The thing is, I think there are a lot of very clever developers out there that needs guidance to what they should do, and Tim, Brion & co should be able to give such guidance. But that can only be done if there exist some kind of strategy document. I was mainly concerned about technical issues, but I think the overall strategy of Wikimedia Foundation is at least as important as the technical issues. Now, one last comment, which I don't think will bring much honour to me, I believe that the management of Wikimedia Foundation should thrive to listen to the board and other members of the community if the have _any_ opinion. Many of the members will have less interesting opinions, but they do speak for _some_ people in the community. Anyhow, in such a large community there will always be some that claims they aren't heard but when someone like Florence says it is difficult to be heard, and then criticized for giving her own opinion, then something should be done. John, which wonders if he ever had a quiet week since he started editing on Wikipedia...

Ting Chen

3:40 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Agenda for October board meeting

Florence Devouard wrote:

...

I think your concern will not improve. After I sent my "10 wishes for 2008", where I tried to outline what was important to me, what I intended to truely put my own energy on, I was told that individual board members should not express such public personal opinions. That such documents should only be the result of a carefully brainstormed time between all board board members and management. That board members should thrive to always appear in agreement, and in particular always supportive of any acts of the management. In short, learn to disagree in silence or quit.

Hello Florence, since this was before my time. I don't know why you are criticized. I personnally agree with you in most of your 10 points except the Wikiconcil part, as we see in Alexandria and thereafter here, the discussion is very tedious and a little aimless. For my part I would criticize one point on your 10 wishes. Though you made it clear that it is your personnal wishes, you publiched it on the foundation site, and not on your personal user page or as a subpage of your user page. Because not everyone can and should publish their personal wishes on the foundation site, it makes it somehow official. It looks like "The State of the Nation of the President". As such it can be understood as an official stance of the foundation and the board. And since it is not, that is bad. I think it is not the problem that every board member take part in discussions inside the community, but as that they are one member of the community, just every other member of the community. As such they should have their own oppinions. I don't think that the board would blame me take part on discussions on this mailing list while I don't discuss every of my opinion with the board. (If it is so, I will inform you. I promise it.) But if you do that, you should always make clear, you are speaking for yourself, not for the board and the foundation. I do think if you are speaking for the foundation or the board, it should be discussed with the other members. Then it is official, and in that case I think the board member should take the official opinion. Ting

Florence Devouard

6:36 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Agenda for October board meeting

Ting Chen wrote:

...

Florence Devouard wrote:

True. Well, primarily, it was an email sent to this list. And signed Ant. If you look at my past emails, you will notice that when I signed ant, or Anthere or Florence, it was *me*. When I signed my full name and added "chair of the board", that was chair of the board. I also remember the topic was discussed. This said, now, the habit is to post messages on the blog rather than on the website itself. As far as I can say, no board member has ever posted there. It'll be interesting to see whether a message from a board member will be considered "board" or "person".

...

I think it is not the problem that every board member take part in discussions inside the community, but as that they are one member of the community, just every other member of the community. As such they should have their own oppinions. I don't think that the board would blame me take part on discussions on this mailing list while I don't discuss every of my opinion with the board. (If it is so, I will inform you. I promise it.) But if you do that, you should always make clear, you are speaking for yourself, not for the board and the foundation. I do think if you are speaking for the foundation or the board, it should be discussed with the other members. Then it is official, and in that case I think the board member should take the official opinion.

Agreed. And the official opinion usually comes from the staff, which prepare the messaging. I know. Follow the party line :-) Well, good luck and I'll be happy to read your opinions anytime you feel like providing them. In case you did not notice, I love debating ;-) Do you feel like pushing your name to be the board representative on the chapcom ? Feel like mentionning the topic this week end ? Have a safe trip. ant

...

Ting _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Ting Chen

10:37 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Agenda for October board meeting

Florence Devouard wrote:

...

Yes, I noticed that. But not all people note that. I normally repeat "personnally I think", which makes my mails no good literate. But I am not going to win Nobel price for literature anyway :-))

...

Well, good luck and I'll be happy to read your opinions anytime you feel like providing them. In case you did not notice, I love debating ;-)

I am more the sort of people who are quiet. But I will make my mouth open if I think it is necessary :-)

...

Do you feel like pushing your name to be the board representative on the chapcom ? Feel like mentionning the topic this week end ? Have a safe trip.

I am not sure. Basically I am very interested in the development of the chapters. And at the moment I am very concerned about the the process for the chapter elected seates and about the further development of the relations between the foundation and the chapters. I think these are very important processes and it is a pity that at this moment we don't have chapter elected trustees who can aptly represent the chapters in these issues. On the otherside, I am not really based in the chapters. I believe we will discuss this issue at the weekend any way and so I would suggest that we wait at first until that discussion is over. If no one want to take the responsibility I would take the charge, yes. Ting

Florence Devouard

2 Oct 2 Oct

12:08 a.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Agenda for October board meeting

Ting Chen wrote:

...

You know... no one on the board currently really is "based in the chapters" any way :-) As for the two seats, much to my disappointment, I feel halted by the tech. I wished to have a separate list created only for that matter (elections), but poor Schiste (French board member) has been desperately trying to get that list created. Unfortunately, after much delay, the new list was buggy. So, still not list :-( That's a bit ridiculous... But we are hosted for free, it is difficult to complain... Ant

Ting Chen

9:39 a.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Agenda for October board meeting

Florence Devouard wrote:

...

Ting Chen wrote:

As I remember there were discussions about if the list should be hosted by the foundation. What is the result? If it should be hosted by the foundation, I will ask at the weekend. Please let me know if I can help. Ting

Thomas Dalton

1 Oct 1 Oct

5:25 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Agenda for October board meeting

...

Who told you that? Judging by the outrage at the proposed "disparagement" policy (in quotes since no-one ever actually defined the term), it seems the community is very much in favour of board members speaking out. If it was the rest of the board telling you to be quiet, then it's simple enough to ignore them - they aren't going to re-elect you!

5679

days inactive

5680

days old

wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

9 comments

5 participants

tags (0)

participants (5)

Florence Devouard
John at Darkstar
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
Thomas Dalton
Ting Chen