wikimedia at alisonwheeler.com
Sat Dec 29 20:47:12 UTC 2007
On Sat, December 29, 2007 17:41, Erik Moeller wrote:
Setting aside for the moment my concerns that Erik is writing opinions
here now that he has been appointed DepED, a clear conflict of involvement
if not of interest ...
> Let me ask you this:
> - Is it important, even critical, that we have a governing Board that
> can effectively provide oversight with regard to the Foundation's
> financial reports, its audit, and its budgets, that can competently
> hire, evaluate and fire an Executive Director, that knows to perform
> reference and background checks, that can ensure legal compliance and
> protect our tax-exempt status, that can reach out to international
> networks to raise funds for the organization?
Of course it is, and the suggestion that it might not be is highly
inappropriate. WMF is an incorporated body with all that that implies and
> - Do the current criteria for Board membership -- making a lot of
> edits on the projects, being a valued community member, being elected
> by your peers -- help to constitute a Board that can serve this
> - If they do not, how does expanding the Board with more community
> members [...] help
> us when it comes to learning lessons from the last year regarding
> corporate governance?
You state these two as though they were mutually exclusive when, very
clearly, they are not. Whilst I would be amongst the first to agree that
there has been possibly too much of the "beauty contest / who has the most
friends" about some past Board elections, it is not beyond the realms of
possibility that some minimum and quantifiable "business understanding /
capability / experience" requirements be set in order for a candidate to
stand in the first place, that endorsements are limited, and that the
community are helped in recognising that the *needs* of the Board are more
than just the presence of names they have heard of.
More information about the foundation-l