Congratulations Maria!
On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Anthony Cole <ahcoleecu(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Welcome back Maria. Recent events have shed a
much-needed bright light on
the board, and it would have been good to hold a community election in that
light. We do have a limited volunteer capacity to manage elections, though,
and I can understand the desire not to impose too much on volunteer
goodwill. A shame, though. We all might have learned something from the
process.
On Saturday, 30 January 2016, Todd Allen <toddmallen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
So, why not make the best of both worlds?
If you need another Trustee immediately, well...I don't really think
that,
you have a quorum without it. And an appointed
trustee who lost a
community
election is not a community elected trustee. It
is insulting to say that
they are. James Heilman was the community trustee, and we still have been
given absolutely no specifics about his removal, just vague handwaves at
"lack of trust". Why, specifically, did he lose your trust? What,
specifically, did he supposedly do wrong?
But if the seat absolutely must be filled, make this an interim
appointment
until a new election is complete, and hold such
an election as soon as
possible. A new election is necessary, and not having one is
unacceptable.
A lot has changed since the last one, and the
individual you appointed
did
not pass the previous election.
Or in other words: This is still not acceptable.
Todd
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Adam Wight <adam.m.wight(a)gmail.com
<javascript:;>> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 6:09 PM Tomasz W.
Kozlowski <
tomasz(a)twkozlowski.com <javascript:;>>
wrote:
> Considering the results of the 2015 May Board elections, I think it
fair
> to say that María’s appointment to the Board
lacks any community
legitimacy
> whatsoever.
I have to disagree with this statement. Please see my analysis of the
election, where I show that Sefidari would have been the top-ranked
candidate if we had counted votes equally.[1] The "oppose" votes you
refer
> to are not serving the purpose you imagine they are, of weeding out
> controversial candidates.
>
> Yet another hugely surprising decision from the Board, I’m sorry to
say.
That's another story... It would be nice to read the minutes of this
Board
> discussion, to see what alternatives were raised and how they were
> evaluated. It would be even nicer if the broader community had been
> directly involved in deciding how to backfill their hatcheted
> representative's seat.
>
> -Adam
> [[mw:User:Adamw]]
>
> [1]
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Adamw/Draft/Board_Election_analysis
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;>
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;>
?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 <javascript:;>
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;>
?subject=unsubscribe>
--
Anthony Cole
_______________________________________________
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>