Hello all!
The Support and Safety team is looking for your thoughts on the recent Wikimedia Foundation elections cycle - that is, the Board of Trustees elections in April/May, and the Funds Dissemination Committee meeting in May/June.
What do you think went well, and what do you think could have gone better?
I'd love your thoughts, either on this email thread or on the dedicated Meta-Wiki page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Post_mor...
Feel free to email me privately if you'd like to.
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts, good or bad. :)
best, Joe
-- *Joe Sutherland* Community Advocate Wikimedia Foundation
Um. I of course mean "election", not "meeting". :)
Joe
-- *Joe Sutherland* Community Advocate Wikimedia Foundation
On 14 July 2017 at 12:46, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hello all!
The Support and Safety team is looking for your thoughts on the recent Wikimedia Foundation elections cycle - that is, the Board of Trustees elections in April/May, and the Funds Dissemination Committee meeting in May/June.
What do you think went well, and what do you think could have gone better?
I'd love your thoughts, either on this email thread or on the dedicated Meta-Wiki page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_ elections/2017/Post_mortem
Feel free to email me privately if you'd like to.
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts, good or bad. :)
best, Joe
-- *Joe Sutherland* Community Advocate Wikimedia Foundation
Joe,
You don't mean "election" when it comes to the Board, unless you mean "election to the position of being considered for appointment by the Board". Unless and until those positions are either truly directly elected by the Community, or the Board commits itself to appointing whomsoever the Community nominates irrespective of the Board's own view of their fitness for the post – which would be a violation of their duty as Trustees – please avoid the misleading term "election" and replace it by "nomination", or "selection", or "pre-election", or some other term that correctly reflects the fact that the only body with power to appoint a Board member is the Board itself.
"Rogol"
On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 8:47 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
Um. I of course mean "election", not "meeting". :)
Joe
-- *Joe Sutherland* Community Advocate Wikimedia Foundation
On 14 July 2017 at 12:46, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hello all!
The Support and Safety team is looking for your thoughts on the recent Wikimedia Foundation elections cycle - that is, the Board of Trustees elections in April/May, and the Funds Dissemination Committee meeting in May/June.
What do you think went well, and what do you think could have gone
better?
I'd love your thoughts, either on this email thread or on the dedicated Meta-Wiki page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_ elections/2017/Post_mortem
Feel free to email me privately if you'd like to.
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts, good or bad. :)
best, Joe
-- *Joe Sutherland* Community Advocate Wikimedia Foundation
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hi Rogol,
I think that suggesting a change of vocabulary is a good idea. I suggest that you place that feedback on the page that Joe linked.
You might also mention -- although I'm not sure whether that page is the best place for this suggestion, but adding it wouldn't hurt -- that WMF could transition itself to be a membership organization with direct elections.
Also, I suggest that we keep in mind that the decision about terminology is probably made made much higher up in the WMF hierarchy than Joe's level. Let's try to be civil to staff who are communicating decisions that trickle down from higher up in the hierarchy.
Pine
On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Rogol Domedonfors domedonfors@gmail.com wrote:
Joe,
You don't mean "election" when it comes to the Board, unless you mean "election to the position of being considered for appointment by the Board". Unless and until those positions are either truly directly elected by the Community, or the Board commits itself to appointing whomsoever the Community nominates irrespective of the Board's own view of their fitness for the post – which would be a violation of their duty as Trustees – please avoid the misleading term "election" and replace it by "nomination", or "selection", or "pre-election", or some other term that correctly reflects the fact that the only body with power to appoint a Board member is the Board itself.
"Rogol"
On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 8:47 PM, Joe Sutherland <jsutherland@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Um. I of course mean "election", not "meeting". :)
Joe
-- *Joe Sutherland* Community Advocate Wikimedia Foundation
On 14 July 2017 at 12:46, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hello all!
The Support and Safety team is looking for your thoughts on the recent Wikimedia Foundation elections cycle - that is, the Board of Trustees elections in April/May, and the Funds Dissemination Committee meeting
in
May/June.
What do you think went well, and what do you think could have gone
better?
I'd love your thoughts, either on this email thread or on the dedicated Meta-Wiki page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_ elections/2017/Post_mortem
Feel free to email me privately if you'd like to.
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts, good or bad. :)
best, Joe
-- *Joe Sutherland* Community Advocate Wikimedia Foundation
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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/wik i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I have views on both votes, but I'll just share one, as I no longer feel that sharing any more of my viewpoint about the WMF board and its elections here or on-wiki would be welcome, or make any difference apart from helping to paint a bigger target on my back.
Having James back on the board is helpful in demonstrating the election has value in its currently limited format, and gave a strong and unambiguous message back to the WMF board of trustees. He provides some of us long termers a friendly private channel with a trustworthy fellow volunteer, who has no worrying political or commercial interests.
Fae
On 14 July 2017 at 20:46, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hello all!
The Support and Safety team is looking for your thoughts on the recent Wikimedia Foundation elections cycle - that is, the Board of Trustees elections in April/May, and the Funds Dissemination Committee meeting in May/June.
What do you think went well, and what do you think could have gone better?
I'd love your thoughts, either on this email thread or on the dedicated Meta-Wiki page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Post_mor...
Feel free to email me privately if you'd like to.
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts, good or bad. :)
best, Joe
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org