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

[Chad]

Yes, but without the editors, where would they be? An empty MediaWiki install.

-Chad

On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 9:09 PM, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hoi,
>  Absolutely NOT. Please read the aims of the Wikimedia Foundation again. You
>  could not be more wrong.
>  Thanks,
>     Gerard
>
>  On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 2:01 AM, Geoffrey Plourde <geo.plrd at yahoo.com>
>
>
> wrote:
>
>  > It is meant to illustrate a point. The sole reason the Foundation exists
>  > is because of the editors that breathe life into it.
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > ----- 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 11:52:35 PM
>  > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Volunteer Council - A shot for a resolution
>  >
>  > 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
>  > >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > foundation-l mailing list
>  > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>  > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>  >
>  > __________________________________________________
>  > Do You Yahoo!?
>  > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>  > http://mail.yahoo.com
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > 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
>