(changing the topic, to avoid doing myself what I criticise)
I would suggest you discuss what kind of qualities you seek in an ED, what
kind of person you would be looking for - rather than specific people. That
would actually be an interesting and valuable discussion to have in public,
I'd think.
Public discussions are good, but not every topic is best discussed in
public (like specific people: there's a reason votes on people are
generally secret). That doesn't mean that every non-public discussion leads
to good results :) In the wikiworld I know, when people are being
discussed, they often nominated themselves, or agreed to be nominated. I
know this may be different on enwiki to some extent, maybe that's a
cultural trait. I haven't encountered this in any other wiki (but may have
missed a few).
But a good framework that came out of a public discussion, may help the
non-public discussion about the names a lot.
Anyway, just my two cents. I can't stop you from shouting names of course...
Best,
Lodewijk
On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 12:23 AM, Yuri Astrakhan <yastrakhan(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
Lodewijk, this is a very valid point, thanks. My
understanding is that
this process done in private has lost some of its credibility with the
staff and the community, and thus I would like to get some understanding on
how we can do that same process in the open, without offending anyone. In
the wiki world, I think most of the time people
have publicly nominated candidates for various roles, and that has not been
a concern. Of course the nick names provide some degree of anonymity, so
this might not be exactly the same.
On Feb 27, 2016 01:57, "Lodewijk" <lodewijk(a)effeietsanders.org> wrote:
While I love public discussions, I must say I
always feel a bit awkward
to
discuss people in public, unless there is no
other choice.
To discuss people without them agreeing to it, may even be considered
rude
by some. You're throwing up names, which can
realistically only lead to
people supporting it, because if you would be against it, it would
possibly
be a slap in the face of someone you like.
If you really see a serious potential candidate, why not send it to the
board? or, once a public call is being made, point those people to it.
Lodewijk
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Yuri Astrakhan <
yastrakhan(a)wikimedia.org
wrote:
For the inside, I would think Yana W would be a
good candidate, but as
Raul
> Veede suggested on FB, it would be bad to loose her expertise in her
> current role.
> Dan, I think you are right that we
are not yet ready to have a drop-in
> replacement simply because we should figure out what went wrong first.
> Possibly we shouldn't even have an ED, but rather have a flatter
> community-driven committee that allocates funds, and projects getting
> resources from it. And this committee would, in affect, be the
> direction-determining force.
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 1:23 AM,
Oliver Keyes <ironholds(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> > I'm agreed with Dan and
Nathan (well, Nathan's implied point) both.
>
> > Right now we need
stability. I'd much prefer an interim ED appointed
> > from inside the organisation or movement, ideally someone who has
been
> > watching what's been going on. And
then time for healing and
> > reflection in that space of stability that lets us make a better
> > decision.
> >
> > I have no particular opinions on Lessig - or on Creative Commons -
> > except to note that the organisational leaders are the people whose
> > opinions on trauma around reorganisations least matter, insofar as,
> > structurally, they are both the people least likely to be messed over
> > by them and the people most detached from any swirling mass of
feeling
> > that exists in the employee base.
I'd be interested instead in
hearing
> from
current or former employees (I know a couple and they are not as
> positive, but it's a small sample size) to make any evaluation more
> informed.
>
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Dan Andreescu <
dandreescu(a)wikimedia.org
> >
> > wrote:
> > > I met him, he's amazingly focused and radical, I appreciate his
brand
> of
> > intellect very much. But I think suggesting candidates for the ED
> position
> > at this time is jumping two steps ahead of where we are.
> > >
> > > We just screwed up. We were all dragged through months of an
awkward
>
collapse of our leadership and organizational structure. Before we
start
piling
the rubble of this collapse back up into the same exact shape
with a
> different keystone, let's take a breath and think.
> >
> > First we should make sure we understand what, more or less, failed.
It
> was not just Lila. Second, we should talk
about what options we have
and
> > what criteria we should use to evaluate those options.
> > >
> > > We can be patient. We have reaffirmed our respect for each other
and
we
> trust each other enough to share ideas,
emotions, and proposals. This
is
> our foundation, and it hasn't
collapsed.
> >
> > Original Message
> > From: Yuri Astrakhan
> > Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 16:47
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Reply To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Lawrence Lessig for ... WMF
> >
> > I would like to continue the discussion of who, in an ideal case,
would
> > be
> > > a good fit for the ED position. This person has to fit culturally,
> share
> > > movement's values, and be a trusted figure in the time of
rebuilding.
> > >
> > > Lawrence Lessig seems to have a very strong support in the
community,
and
> even attempted to run (unsuccessfully) a
large organization called
United
> > States.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
,
>
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?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
> > Unsubscribe:
,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?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
> > 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/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>
_______________________________________________
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>
_______________________________________________
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>