On 9/16/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)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