[Foundation-l] Board statement of responsibility

[Nathan]

I wonder what the rest of the Board thinks about this? I personally would
prefer and ask that no document be signed by any board members without the
unanimous consent of the Board, and that this not be presented as a
requirement for any new Board members. Are there alternative versions of
this statement? Are Mike and Sue open to reviewing alternative versions
presented?

Nathan

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> --- On Wed, 5/21/08, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > A controversial policy with no consequences creates more
> > heat than
> > light.  It is one thing to have Board members sign an
> > agreement, but it
> > is an exercise in futility when that agreement extends
> > three years
> > beyond one's term of office without any idea about what
> > will happen if a
> > person is found in breach.
> >
>
> I agree with that.  I was just trying to focus on the effect the policy
> would have on the wider community rather than the trustees who might sign
> it.  So I was ignoring the reasons why it might be a bad idea for individual
> to sign such an agreement.
>
> However I definitely understand why someone would not want to sign such a
> thing for their own part. In reality such individual concerns probably just
> become a starting point for a negotiation.  Offer a proposal of what you
> would be willing to sign and then receive a counter proposal.  And find the
> line where WMF agrees that trying to oust a board member or disqualify an
> election winner will bring more trouble than the differences between the
> drafts. And that is the arena of lawyers not the peanut gallery.
>
> Birgitte SB
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>