[Foundation-l] Reply to Mark
oldakquill at gmail.com
Tue Feb 26 20:02:22 UTC 2008
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 26/02/2008, Claudio Mastroianni wrote:
> Il giorno 26/feb/08, alle ore 17:45, Florence Devouard ha scritto:
> > Meeting is saturday.
> > But to avoid any disappointment Dan... I doubt very much that any sort
> > of announcement will happen in the subsequent week. Here is why.
> > As part of our growth, we must try to be careful to identify what is
> > the
> > role of the board, and what is the role of the ED. And to convey the
> > difference to the community.
> > I'd say that it is within the role of the board to say
> > "we want a Wikimania every year. This should be a meeting of roughly
> > 300-400 people, mostly wikimedians; an opportunity to participants to
> > meet face to face and share experiences, have fun, and bond. Also an
> > opportunity to push certain agendas, meet with the press, expand the
> > fan
> > circle, hear big leaders in the free movement, in the wiki world, in
> > the
> > educational system etc... Should propose scholarship. Should be in
> > various places around the world. As much as possible, should be a cost
> > free even for the WMF."
> > Then, the role of the ED is to make sure that this happens. It is her
> > job to ensure that the event is successful, financially sound... and
> > probably that security of participants is taken care of.
> > Right now, two situations may happen.
> > The ED herself might wonder if there might be problems because of
> > hersay, mails on the list, press, private emails, whatever...
> > Or the board might wonder if there might be problems.
> > If the board thinks there might be problems, the wise thing to do is
> > for
> > the board to ask the ED to conduct a study, analyze the risks given
> > the
> > latest circonstances, evaluate which steps may be followed to balance
> > the risk if there is one, do contingency planning, and estimate the
> > consequences of cancelling or moving the event elsewhere. Naturally,
> > the
> > analysis is not fully conducted by Sue, but done with the help of many
> > parties.
> > Then, the ED will present her conclusions to the board, and provide
> > some
> > recommandations. Based on the ED recommandations, the board may either
> > decide to delegate full authority to Sue to make the decision herself,
> > or the board will take a decision *with* Sue.
> > So, what I plan to do Saturday is to ask the board whether they
> > consider
> > new circonstances are worth requesting a more straightforward study of
> > the situation and steps to ensure security. The board can either
> > dismiss
> > the issue I raise, or agree to ask for a recommandation from Sue.
> > THEN, it will be up to Sue to act. And I doubt she will make any
> > suggestion in 2-3 days.
> A process ending in September?
> Question: WHY didn't the Wikimania Grand Chooser Committee considered
> all those problems _before_?
> They were clearly foreseenable.
> This is the same problem, every year: the choose in unexplicable.
I had taken the 'new circumstances' that Florence talked about to
refer to the images of Muhammad's face, rather than the issues
relating to the safety of homosexuals or women... [Yes, those latter
issues were foreseeable.]
Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the foundation-l