[Foundation-l] Opinions/suggestions for "outside" members of the board?

[Erik Moeller]

On 6/20/06, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
> I'm not sure what his problem with RMS and Eben Moglen are.

I don't have a "problem" with _any_ of the people listed bringing
their substantial experience and allowing us to benefit from it. I
have worked closely with Larry and Richard on the Free Content
Definition, and their detailed and qualified feedback has been
instrumental to get to the point where we are now. Doing so has also
shown me how very different their perspectives are.

Their tremendous qualifications and immense contributions to our
broader movement aside, as I said (and as Kelly Martin also pointed
out), I think we need to think carefully about whether they need to be
on the _governing_ Board of the organization.

RMS and Larry Lessig "battling it out", as you say, on the mailing
list is one thing; them actually voting on whether we should adopt
this or that licensing model is quite another. Here I think a full and
deep understanding of the needs and practices of the community is
required to make a well-informed decision, based, quite possibly, on
the actively solicited _input_ of people like the ones mentioned.

For instance, RMS is a strong advocate of copyleft. Wikinews chose to
adopt CC-BY, without copyleft. I could easily see such a decision
escalating to a significant and avoidable Board level conflict. I
could also see one of these appointees holding a key vote in a split
decision. I would prefer the final call to always be made by he
community, or at least by members of the Board who have some long term
involvement there.

This concern is somewhat made obsolete if we choose to adopt an
Executive Committee (a subset of the Board which reports to the
Board), and where people like the ones mentioned would likely not
participate due to time constraints alone. However, it remains true in
any case that the Board is the final legal authority of the
organization, and can restructure it as it requires.

I favor a Board fully elected by the community, which makes its
strategic and organizational decisions based on a broad and diverse
basis of information. An Advisory Council strikes me as the best way
to achieve this. Failing such a Board setup, I would prefer appointees
from outside fields that are not represented in our current group, and
who will abstain on some of the issues where their qualifications  do
not come into play.

Erik