On 9/16/06, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro(a)gmail.com> wrote:
My personal strong feeling is that instead of choosing
one appointed
member, the board should appoint two, and appoint them as *permanent*,
life members of the board . Daniel Mayer and Angela Beesley.
Please, no... I left for a reason. Well, about 10 reasons actually.
I'm very pleased I won't be doing this in a week's time. :)
On 9/16/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)wikia.com> wrote:
I invite an open discussion here of the candidates.
This is your
community, speak openly of who you trust and why.
My view on who should be elected is already public, but for those who
don't read meta, I believe Erik is the only candidate capable of
having any positive influence within the current Board. Later, when
that Board is expanded and the continuous internal conflicts are
resolved, I would agree that Mindspillage and Oscar may be good
candidates in future. I would also trust Steve Dunlop and Juan David
Ruiz in the role, but right now - Erik is what the Board and
Foundation needs.
It's very long, but well worth reading if you're serious about your
vote:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Eloquence/Platform_2006
I strongly support this platform and as I said at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Eloquence/Endorse_2006 I believe
Erik is the best candidate to represent the community in the
development of the Wikimedia Foundation over the coming year. Erik has
shown a continued commitment, not only to Wikipedia but to the
Wikimedia Foundation as a whole. Erik's commitment to the sort of
openness that will ensure the community will have an influence in
ensuring the Foundation meets its goals makes me happy to endorse him
as the person to replace me on the Board.
Angela
--
Angela Beesley
http://a.nge.la