[Foundation-l] Volunteer Council - A shot for a resolution

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
So who is going to say that they "screwed up" and why will their arguments
ring true? Given the large amount of freedom that the projects and their
communities have, how much damage can the Foundation do?

If you consider that it is only recent that we have a start of a
professional organisation, it is as likely that the communities cannot keep
up with the changes implemented for the better by the organisation. Given
the sometimes not so great performance by the WMF in the past, and given the
more apparent clarification of the roles between on the one hand the
organisation and on the other the board, it will become increasingly
difficult to blame the Foundation and not be seen as factional in the
condemnation.

PS an army without soldiers cannot fight? what army and if so what it the
chain of command? It sounds more like a rabble to me. We are not fighting;
we are writing free/open content a much more private occupation.
Thanks,
     GerardM

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 11:47 PM, Geoffrey Plourde <geo.plrd at yahoo.com>
wrote:

> The Board is accountable. If they really screwed up, you know what would
> happen? Somebody would lead an exodus of most of the editors and start a new
> Foundation. An army without soldiers can not fight.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 7:10:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Volunteer Council - A shot for a resolution
>
> Hoi,
> When you want to change something, you may be of the opinion that some
> things should be different. In the mean time it is existing board that has
> to vote in the changes that you propose. In all the things that have been
> said there is nothing that makes people accountable. The current board is
> not accountable; we do not have a clue how well board members perform. It
> is
> only the executive director who is accountable.. accountable to the board.
>
> Because of your involvement it is acceptable/legitimate for you to propose
> changes to the way the WMF operates. In the final analysis however it is
> only the board that is in the position to act upon it.
> Thanks,
>    GerardM
>
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Milos Rancic <millosh at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 3/15/08, Geoffrey Plourde <geo.plrd at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >  2) The Board is already accountable to the community, through the
> > annual election.
> >
> > While we are moving toward this model, this is still a gray zone. Only
> > Florence, Kat and Frieda are elected members of the Board. And (at
> > least for me) only three of them have legitimacy to choose other
> > members of the Board.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>
>  ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Be a better friend, newshound, and
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>