[Foundation-l] Policy governance ends

GerardM gerard.meijssen at gmail.com
Wed Apr 18 16:44:36 UTC 2007

Anthere when the next elections happen, it will be vitally important that
the people on the board work together well. The WMF is overworked and
underfunded. There is not really time to wage wars. There is too much to do.

Danny indicated that he wants to be considered for a post of the board. He
stated that he would not discuss his own behaviour, why he chose to resign,
until the start of his campaign for board membership. Given his sniping, his
campaign has started. Given the negative campaign Danny is waging, I cannot
see him becoming a positive force on the board. Given that he did not want
to discuss why he resigned in a positive way, I can only urge people to
consider if a negative campaign can make a positive politician. It would
also be good to consider if we need politicians or if we need managers who
people the board of our foundation.

It was my pleasure to vote for you when I had the opportunity. I think you
do great work. I think you have done great work and I hope the quality of
the people on the board will only get better and not worse.


On 4/18/07, Florence Devouard <Anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Delirium wrote:
> > daniwo59 at aol.com wrote:
> >>
> >> This seems like a futile exercise. The appearance it gives is that
> you  don't
> >> know what you are doing. As for the executive, perhaps things did not
> get
> >> done because it was not empowered to do them.
> >>
> >
> > This must be the 4th or 5th of these sorts of "Danny dislikes Anthere"
> > passive-aggressive emails.  This nonsense is getting tiresome.  If you
> > have actual criticisms to make, make them.  If not, kindly do take your
> > personal disputes elsewhere.
> >
> > -Mark
> As far as I know, I have no *personal* disputes with Danny, so I am not
> sure what we could put "elsewhere". There is no "Danny dislikes Anthere"
> in my world.
> I am more the recipiendary of many months of frustration from his part;
> either because I am the chair of the organisation;
> or more likely because I am the only one on the board currently raising
> governance questions publicly and trying to discuss these issues openly
> (great opportunity to vent).
> I am fine with criticism of proposals.
> I am not happy with personnal attacks. It is damaging us. Not only me,
> but us. Because there is only so much personnal attacks I am going to
> take. When I am spoken this way, my patience wears thin, I start
> answering shortly, I get rude to my co-board members, I might consider
> stopping discussing governance publicly entirely, or I might quit.
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

More information about the foundation-l mailing list