[Foundation-l] About transparency

[Erik Moeller]

On 12/30/07, daniwo59 at aol.com <daniwo59 at aol.com> wrote

> And you did not reject it because of your previous commitment to a  six-month
> waiting period, which was voted on unanimously by the Board just 2 and  a
> half weeks earlier. (Kat voted for six months for Board-->Staff, but seems  to
> have rejected Staff-->Board).

I see no reason why any decision for transitions to Board or Staff
should not be made on its merits until a specific policy governing
such transitions in place. We're in the middle of a relocation and the
setup of a new office, and part of Sue's desire to bring me in is to
have me help with the orientation of new staff: These goals would be
impeded by waiting for 6 months to join.

We are not talking about a complete restriction of such transitions,
after all, only about a delay; if the discussion had focused on
eliminating even the possibility of Board members joining the staff or
vice versa, it would be much more problematic.
-- 
Erik Möller