[Foundation-l] The role of the board

[Delirium]

Jimmy Wales wrote:

> The board doesn't represent the community, per se, but rather has a 
> legal responsibility to carry out our charitable mission, which of 
> course involves profound respect for the community.

That's only true for the unelected 3/5 of the board---two of the board 
members very explicitly represent the community, and indeed the 
community can replace them at the next election if it dislikes how it's 
being represented.

> This only comes up in some counterfactual hypotheticals -- suppose we 
> have a huge influx of newcomers from our newfound fame, and people 
> want to turn this into a big joke project?  Suppose the community 
> votes to abandon neutrality in favor of, hmm, let's say support for 
> the US war on terror?  Some things, like Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, 
> and NPOV, are not negotiable, as is my firm insistence that what we 
> are doing is to be a *high quality* work first, are not negotiable, 
> and if the community doesn't like it, we have to find different people 
> to be a part of the community.

This seems incompatible with en eventual move to an all-elected board; 
does that mean the board will perpetually have less than 50% of its 
members be elected?  I was under the impression that that was only a 
temporary situation, not a permanent one.

-Mark