[Foundation-l] Notice of the results of the WMF Board of Trustees election

[Alison Wheeler]

(Apols if I get the quoting wrong on this - there are too many levels!)

> <begin Dedalus quote>
> "My impression is that voter turn out in countries with a local chapter
>  of the Wikimedia Foundation are highest ranking. Correct me if I'm
>  wrong.

I believe this is wrong, or rather it is not a case of cause and effect as
the OP suggested. Chapter generally have been and are being formed in the
places where the editors living in that area are most active. As such it
cannot be a surprise that their 'offline' activities are being matched by
their 'online' prevalence for voting in the recent election.

On Sat, July 14, 2007 19:11, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
> I'll go further than that. The chapters being active in the election
> of board of trustees would in no way or shape of form create
> legal liability for edits on the wikies run by the Foundation, any
> more than a citizens action group promoting interest in some
> national election would by this action assume legal liability for
> passing the laws written by the governing body to which the
> representatives were elected. I am sure you are the only one
> reading this to whom this needs to be explained.

Here I must again disagree. Speaking for a moment as the Chair of the UK
Chapter, I would be *very* wary of our having a voice/vote in the
selection of the Board of the Foundation because, imho, it *would* create
a legal connection between us. Whilst there are certainly issues around
the responsibility for 'edits' on the projects, there is a greater
requirement that there is a clear separation of (legal) responsibilities
as might relate to the ownership and content of the projects. I, for one,
would not countenance a formal relationship of this kind.

Ec wrote:
> I would have concerns about the intelligence of a person who accepts a
> job counting paperclips.  I would quesion his suitability for a
> responsible Board position, and let my vote be guided accordingly. :-)

My bigger concern would be for the Board; these are online projects so
what are the paperclips for! ;-P

Seriously though, I have absolutely no problem with former employees
seeking to become elected representatives on the Board. Just as Civil
servants in the UK are permitted to stand as councillors and MPs so long
as they resign their {local|state} government job first, so we should
welcome people who have been 'at the sharp end' in the Foundation and
still want to see it improve by working _voluntarily_ (rather than as a
_paid_ employee) to that end.

I would be *very* concerned though about the reverse; for someone to leave
the Board and then be appointed within weeks or months to a paid position
by the remaining board would, imho, be reprehensible and an unacceptable
way to proceed.


Alison Wheeler