On 9/16/06, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
I personally strongly strongly support the candidacies of Oscar and Mindspillage.
Angela wrote "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."
Erik Moeller wrote and asked:
I am on the record as stating that the majority of any future expanded Board should be elected by the community (possibly through a membership model, but not necessarily so). However, in that model, sitting Board members can provide balance and reason by endorsing particular candidacies. Angela has endorsed me, and I think it is vital for you, Anthere and Michael to also share your views on the candidates.
My answer
Several people have asked me publicly or privately who I was endorsing.
I have been wondering as early as july whether I would/should publicly endorse candidates and if so, how I should do it.
After careful thinking, I have decided against providing any public endorsement.
I believe the board can provide balance either through appointment of new members, or through the people it chooses to trust to help with Foundation organisation. The elections rest in editors hands and I trust editors to make a good choice themselves.
Last point: even if I had decided to endorse one or several candidates, it would have been, at latest, on the first day of election. Never three days before the end of it. I view endorsing candidates in the last few days of elections as a most inappropriate attempt of manipulation of the elections outcome.
Florence Devouard