Sue Gardner writes:
Would inviting Matt to join create perception problems? Probably not among external stakeholders because donors serving on boards is fairly normal in non-profit land, but yes among community members, because the community is (appropriately) a fierce defender of the independence of the projects. Should the board do what it thinks is best for the organization and the movement, even if its decisions/actions are unpopular? The board decided yes. Should the board try to separate the grant announcement from the Matt announcement to mitigate community anger? No, because that would be disingenuous. And, it might actually increase anger rather than mitigating it.
In my view, Sue has expressed the reasoning of the Board in a nutshell here. Remember that the Board recognized the risks of appointing Matt, and nevertheless appointed him anyway. The community plays a large role in selecting Board members, and it is appropriate to keep this in mind when voting on Board seats. Nevertheless, I think the Board made a hugely intelligent and attentive decision in appointing Matt, and I think it is best if the community acknowledges and honors that decision, which comes in part from Board members the community supports.
--Mike Godwin
Hoi, Hear, hear !! Thanks, GerardM
On 25 June 2011 07:29, Mike Godwin mnemonic@gmail.com wrote:
Sue Gardner writes:
Would inviting Matt to join create perception problems? Probably not among external stakeholders because donors serving on boards is fairly normal in non-profit land, but yes among community members, because the community is (appropriately) a fierce defender of the independence of the projects. Should the board do what it thinks is best for the organization and the movement, even if its decisions/actions are unpopular? The board decided yes. Should the board try to separate the grant announcement from the Matt announcement to mitigate community anger? No, because that would be disingenuous. And, it might actually increase anger rather than mitigating it.
In my view, Sue has expressed the reasoning of the Board in a nutshell here. Remember that the Board recognized the risks of appointing Matt, and nevertheless appointed him anyway. The community plays a large role in selecting Board members, and it is appropriate to keep this in mind when voting on Board seats. Nevertheless, I think the Board made a hugely intelligent and attentive decision in appointing Matt, and I think it is best if the community acknowledges and honors that decision, which comes in part from Board members the community supports.
--Mike Godwin _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org