[Foundation-l] About transparency

daniwo59 at aol.com daniwo59 at aol.com
Sun Dec 30 13:12:29 UTC 2007

In a message dated 12/30/2007 8:06:15 AM Eastern Standard Time,  
erik at wikimedia.org writes:

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

Perhaps so, but I can only go by what I see in the minutes, which you, as  
Executive Secretary, presumably took:
4) Employees elected to the Board 
Brief discussion about whether there should be a waiting period for former  
employees / former Board members interested in running in a Board election or  
becoming part of the staff. 
    *   Jan-Bart, Erik, Frieda, Florence: symmetrical 6 months waiting period 
    *   Kat: 6 months waiting period for Board members only 
Nowhere in the proposal does it say "on its merits" or "unless  
inconvenient." The discussion, which you seeming supported, was precisely  about a "delay."

**************************************See AOL's top rated recipes 

More information about the foundation-l mailing list