daniwo59 at aol.com
daniwo59 at aol.com
Sun Dec 30 02:51:47 UTC 2007
In a message dated 12/29/2007 12:42:12 PM Eastern Standard Time,
erik at wikimedia.org writes:
- 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 and, simultaneously, creating a community-run Wikicouncil help
us when it comes to learning lessons from the last year regarding
Just for purposes of clarification, can you please explain how this
coincides with your election statements:
"This is why I have always insisted that the majority of the Board of
Trustees should be made of (preferably elected) members of the community. It was
partially my insistence that led to this principle being written into the
_Foundation Bylaws_ (http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Bylaws) ."
"I would like to see our Board expanded to nine members. Jimmy has indicated
that he would not mind his status to be that of an elected member at some
point, which would mean that we could have 4 appointed members in compliance
with the present bylaws. This allows us to bring seasoned professionals from
outside our project communities on board, to assist in matters such as
fundraising, financial oversight, governance policy, and so forth. That does not mean
that these same skills should not also be present in elected Board members.
*But the community will, probably, typically focus less on these skills and
more on the content of their platforms, their conduct and standing in the
community, their cultural and intellectual background, the principles they
espouse, and so forth.* These factors, on the other hand, will be less important
for appointed Board members from outside the community. And this is exactly
what I see reflected in the existing Wikimedia Board of Trustees."
In other words, you won the election, fair and square, campaigning on a
platform advocating a community-majority board. This is in contrast with me, for
instance, who campaigned on a platform advocating a professional board. Are
you saying that since the election, less that six months ago, you have
rejected your platform and adopted my position?
On the one hand, I am glad that you have come around to my way of thinking.
On the other hand, I am a bit surprised by this apparent inconsistency in
your position and, even more so, by what could be conceived as a failure to
represent the interests of your constituents as promised in your platform.
Peace, love, and professionalism,
**************************************See AOL's top rated recipes
More information about the foundation-l