daniwo59@aol.com wrote:

Florence, Thank you for your email. I will try to clarify exactly what you are saying— the best way to do that is to read your email from bottom to top. You wrote: " As I was explaining, we have no ED. Which means that the points listed above as ED issues will either be left unfixed until we have one, or will have to be dealt with by someone else (undefined). We might make an exception and hire a legal coordinator, because this is a critical issue." So let us look at the critical issues. I can safely assume that "Do it soon and is important" is most critical

• Coordinate legal activities (ED)
• Job description for all (ED)
• Personnel needs (ED)

Note that they are all ED. Am I too assume that, except for the coordination of legal activities, these will all be left unfixed until there is an ED, or will they be dealt with by some undefined else. It seems the former is the answer, with the exception of a legal coordinator. In other words, are you leaving the most pressing issues unfixed? If it is the latter "undefined else," how will the "else" be selected?

Note that all those tasks are not necessarily DONE by the ED, but under the responsability of the ED. Which makes a difference.

The general answer is "unfixed". Practically, we will depend on the good will of volunteer board members, and on the good will of staff who prefer helping than quitting. Eh !

Next came, " Do it soon (but not necessarily very important)"

• Data Gathering (ED)
• Fundraising Planning (ED)
• Board Skills and Expansion and Election (board)
• Short term budget (COO)
• Wikimania Finances (ED)
• Tech stuff in office (ED)

4 out of 6 are ED-related. Am I too assume here that this "do it soon category" is delayed as well? (Wiktionary defined "soon" as "Within a short time; _quickly_ (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/quickly) .") In fact, the only Board-related one involves the upcoming election for community representatives. That will be soon, even though it is "not necessarily very important").

I have spent the whole week trying to work on wikimania finances, sponsorship and fundraising. As a volunteer. And largely because the staff member who was in charge of these topics choose to quit without a warning nor an explanation.

The good news is that simply in a week, several volunteers showed up to help. For example, Pyb and Schiste are helping on the sponsorship.

As for the budget, it requires receiving financial information from the COO. Once received, we'll work on the budget.

Tech stuff has been fixed with hiring Rob full time.

As for Data Gathering, though mentionned urgent, there was a biais in the vote as it was mostly supported by ONE board member. I take it that if this board member consider the task important, he will take care of it.

Elections are planned in june, so there is ample time.

Finally, you had " Important (but not necessarily to do immediately)"

• Brand Strategy (board)
• Business Development Strategy (board)
• Technical Management (ED)

What professional expertise does the Board bring to the first two? When talking about a brand worth billions of dollars--and that means billions of dollars for free culture and knowledge--I would assume that the Board would consider some professional advice and assistance.

Yes, a company proposed its assistance. It is called Landor. (www.landor.com). Plenty of impressing customers. The fact you did not hear about something does not mean it does not exist.

As for the last point, Technical

Management, I assume you mean managing Brion, Tim, Domas, Mark, and the other developers. Wouldn’t the last be the job a CTO, and not the board?

Please read again. It is not written board, it is written ED. A CTO (or a project leader) is under the responsability of the ED)

As for some of the other topics discussed, you wrote "What can be mentioned probably is this:"

• work on a travel policy (nothing very fancy to report)

I ask: what is the current travel policy which is being amended?

A policy was set up in 2004. It allowed 1000 dollars per trimester per board member, 3000 dollars for the chair. This is the last "validated one".

• work on a policy for reimbursement (nothing very fancy to report)

I ask: what is the current reimbursement policy, which is being amended. If there is no reimbursement policy, how are reimbursements made? What is eligible for reimbursement and what is not?

No written policy being amended. We agreed on reimbursement of travel costs (2nd class), food and hotel, as indicated on the reimbursement sheet done by Mav many months ago. Additionally, last summer, there was an agreement to reimburse me nanny costs when I was travelling on the board behalf. Receipts must be provided.

• study of some collaboration propositions (details confidential)

I hope you don’t mean the collaboration proposals with three major organizations in DC that I brought to the table. If you do, why was I not asked about them?

No, I am talking about other propositions which are confidential and which you were not involved in.

• study around brand licensing (not surprisingly since we are in the top

of most recognised brands, we get some propositions from branding companies. Brand licensing is probably one of our best assets to collect money for the development of the projects in the future, so we should be careful about what we do on the topic. Brand licensing has also various ramifications, in particular in our relationships with chapters). Blah blah blah—who on the Board is actually qualified to discuss this on a professional level?

No one, which is why we created an advisory board, and ask help from companies, especially those who accept to work on a pro bono basis. But you are welcome to tell future voters that they should elect a community member being a specialist of brand licensing. Note that you are not a specialist of brands either.

• approval of two new advisory board members

Can you please provide a summary of what the advisory board has done or been asked to do to date. Not who is on it, but what they actually do.

See Angela answer. As far as the issues I am involved in are concerned, Trevor, Mitch and Melissa have helped for the ED search. Debbie and Ethan on the fundraising. Ward and Peter have helped on the legal research. Other board members may have different experiences. We certainly could involve them more, but we have already built some relationships with them and worked on several issues. There is only so much we can do.

• discussion about a future CTO or a tech project leader. No conclusion at

the moment. Does that mean that there is no direction in technical development as of now?

I will let current developers appreciate that comment.

Considering the size of the website and the amount of money poured into

tech development, a basic roadmap should be the least one should come to expect.

Most of the money is poured in hardware. Very little is poured in development proper. But yes, we need a road map. Which is why we are looking for someone to help. However, this person should fit with the current team to ensure jewels will born from the relationship. I really wanted us to take a decision on this issue at the board meeting, but the tech guys did not seem fully decided, so better take a bit more time and explore all the options. I do not think there is a reason to hurry here to the point of making a decision in 2 days. Sometimes, it is good to take the time to take a decision.

You also wrote: "During that week, the office was really populated, as it also hosted two other meetings, one dedicated to Quality (might be worthwhile to ask Greg to make a report on this one...), " While Greg is extremely qualified to report on that, you might also ask the person who organized it. Oh, and how much time did the Board take discussing its recommendations.

Oh good point. Since you were the organiser of that meeting, can you provide me the budget where we approved the expenses related to that meeting ?

As for the time spent discussing the recommandations, I would say that given that the recommandations were presented 2 hours before the end of the board meeting and that the issue was not on the agenda... of course, it was not further discussed. Not everyone is a workalcoholic :-)

You wrote: "Delphine was also in Florida for several days." It is always very nice to see Delphine. What was her role in these meetings?

I was not the organiser of the tech meeting. I am still wondering who organised it really. I was not the organiser of the quality meeting. You were. I was the organiser of the board meeting, and I did not invite her.

However, contrariwise to you, Delphine has an approved travel budget, and by default, I consider staff is not "dumb" and if she thought she needed travel, then she did need travel. The board is not the police. She knows pretty well that if she does not do her job and abuse things, she can be fired. It is not your place to judge her work and the way she organises herself. That goes for every employee.

Or does that go under the discussed Travel Policy (to quote you, "nothing very fancy to report.")

The travel policy is the one related to the board. Not the travel policy of the employees. The travel policy of the employees is set up by the ED, not the board.

It would also be nice to hear some more elaboration from you about the "difference of opinion" between the Board and the Search Firm regarding the role of an ED. How does the Board see the role? How does the Search Firm see the role? What efforts are being made to bridge this difference?

I would prefer that you be blunt and say your word rather than turning around the pot Danny.

All in all, it sounds like a fascinating meeting. I look forward to reading the minutes.

Ah, confidential :-) Too bad. But they were written Danny, be reassured.

Danny

You know Danny... I like you. But here, I think what you are doing is wrong. Really wrong.

There is a big difference between having an opinion and voicing it, and attacking someone who is trying in good faith to do the best she can for the organisation. There is no one and nothing preventing you to speak and give your opinion. However, please drop the nastiness. That is not correct.

anthere

Hoi, When you resigned, you did not want to motivate your reasons. You said you would candidate for the board of trusties. You said that at that time you would give us your motivation.

Do I understand that you have started your campaign for election? If so we are entitled to the promised motivation. If not, it would help to have a more constructive response. I am a bit puzzled with your choice of not being open about your motivations, I am as puzzled about what you hope to achieve. The right way to go about things is by fixing issues, suggesting solutions.. Given your recent occupation, your insights might be perfectly valid and relevant; by not sharing your ideas they become stale.

It is your choice. I hope you will not become one of those that can only snipe from the sidelines, I hope that you keep your relevance by doing the right thing.

Thanks, GerardM