[Foundation-l] Restricting Appointed members (Proposal).

Geoffrey Plourde geo.plrd at yahoo.com
Mon Mar 17 19:28:09 UTC 2008


No I didn't. I meant that I foresaw that if enacted and there were a sudden die off of members, technically the Board could end up being in violation.



----- Original Message ----
From: Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 10:36:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Restricting Appointed members (Proposal).

> This provision is meant to close the loophole of appointments to resignations.

Are you suggesting all resignations of elected members lead to
immediate by-elections, or am I misunderstanding you? Do you really
think it's necessary to have by-elections when we have regular
elections every year? Elections take a lot of organisation and time
and having one every time there's an empty seat seems inefficient. It
also means the board could fall below minimum of 7 members required by
Article IV Section 2 and it would take a significant amount of time (a
month at a bare minimum, I would think) before that could be
corrected, I don't think that's a good thing.

_______________________________________________
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 


More information about the foundation-l mailing list