[Foundation-l] Voting requirements for community selected seats (Was: unable to vote)

[Samuel Klein]

On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 9:33 PM, Lars Aronsson <lars at aronsson.se> wrote:

> Dan Rosenthal wrote:
>
> > Lodewijk, it's worth noting that several of the board candidates
> > (myself included), have interpreted "community selected seats"
> > as inherently being "community representative seats", meaning
>

These board seats were originally explicitly intended to represent the
community (in fact two different subsets of it), so this is not just the
interpretation of some current candidates.

> the desires of the community. There's no written rule that says
> it has to be that way, but rather a moral obligation towards the
> community, even beyond that of the electorate.

Yes, this obligation certainly extends beyond the electorate; I don't agree
with effe at all that those who cannot vote are not represented; indeed as
many of the newer and more interesting ideas in any community come from its
newest members, those deserve attention for their fresh perspective just as
longstanding contributors do for their commitment and experience.

In particular, we have many people who could be counted as our
> community, but who aren't currently allowed to vote for the board.
>

This is true, and in some ways unfortunate -- at least if 'voting' is what
really counts in our Board elections.  but our Board and community are
unusual, and significantly more directly engaged than most.  Directly asking
and answering questions, proposing specific detailed ideas or [re]solutions,
and amplifying the voices of others can be done by anyone so motivated...
This has significantly more impact than one's actual vote.



> I suggest that the people who are elected or appointed in various
> ways see this as a strike of luck, and once on the board they only
> claim to represent themselves, as best they can, for the good of
> all mankind.  I don't mind the WMF being undemocratic.  I think
>

Lars, I generally agree with your ideas, but I can't understand how you
would say on the one hand that a Board member who feels responsible to
represent the community should not say so; and on the other that they should
represent themselves "for the good of mankind", something fare more complex.

Community representatives should make every effort to represent the views of
the community, not their own -- personal opinions should take a back seat to
revealing, understanding, organizing and clearly expressing the drives,
fears, priorities, and ideas of different community groups.  This is true
whether said representatives are elected, appointed, or emerge fully formed
from the top of The Great Wikiball.

SJ