How is that a conflict of interest?
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:17 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 20 February 2013 11:17, Andrew Turvey <andrewrturvey@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> I presume this decision was taken at the last board meeting on 9-10
>> February. It's very disappointing that the draft minutes of the last board
>> meeting still haven't been published, a week and a half after the meeting. I
>> asked when this would be published over a week ago and was told that a
>> reasonably final draft was available on Sunday. Chapter policy says that
>> "Volunteers are encouraged to ... hold the Trustees and staff to account,
>> through public and private discussion". [2] It's impossible to do this if
>> we're not even allowed to see on a timely basis the decisions that are being
>> made by the board.
>
> Publishing draft minutes is quite unusual for a board - most I'm aware
> of don't publish minutes until they are formally approved at the next
> meeting (which can be months later) - so I'm not sure a week and a
> half really qualifies as untimely. I doubt the minutes say much, any
> way. The discussion was presumably in camera, so there will just be
> the final decision in the public minutes and we've already been told
> about that.
The minutes will, or should, note if there were any conflicts of
interest. e.g. *if* Greyham applied due to the direct personal
approaches, that should be noted.
--
John Vandenberg
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org