[Foundation-l] The Foundation is not a wiki (was Re: RfC: Key priorities for my work)

[Delirium]

Daniel Mayer wrote:
> --- Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
>   
>> Now of course the Board doesn't actually control the community, only the 
>> legal foundations and servers, but if a group of essentially outsiders 
>> became a majority and chose to take it in a direction the community 
>> disagreed with, it would cause significant chaos as the community would 
>> be forced to waste time either pushing back against them or 
>> forking---always a possibility, but a disruptive one that results in a 
>> lot of needless delay in progress.
>>
>> We have something like tens of thousands of Wikipedians (hundreds of 
>> thousands?), so I'm skeptical that the skills we're looking for don't 
>> exist anywhere in our community.
>>     
>
> The question I was answering from Angela was concerned with the issue of using community voting vs
> appointment to expand the board. I was NOT advocating bringing in outsiders to serve on the board
> (that is what the advisory board is for). Our community is huge and of course we have most if not
> all of the expertise needed. But to ensure we have that expertise on the board, we either need to
> appoint some members or have elections for roles that require candidates to have appropriate
> credentials and experience (not unlike electing judges or district attorneys in the U.S.). 
>   

Oh, in that case I agree.  I'd be fine with setting aside some board 
seats for specific roles.  It may be worth enforcing credentials for 
some, especially if they have to deal with the government, but even 
without doing that I'd imagine the community will elect people 
appropriately---if one seat is set aside for "someone knowledgeable in 
legal matters", then a lawyer would probably win an election over a 
non-lawyer even if we let non-lawyers run.

-Mark