[Foundation-l] board candidacies

[Anthere]

Anthony wrote:
> "When it is said that a board member only needs to spend "only" a few
> hours a week on this function, the reality is very much ignored. By
> expressing that this "should be the case" and by not indicating what
> needs to be done to make this happen, I am afraid that false
> expectations are raised."
> 
> I believe that getting the Wikimedia Foundation to a point where each
> board member only needs to spend a couple hours a week is a perfectly
> reasonable expectation.

Agreed.
But I fear we are not yet ready for that.

   To provide a specific outline as to what
> needs to happen, the board members who feel that they need to spend
> more time than that would need to provide an outline of what they do
> spend their time on.

Ya. Good question. This might be relevant information for future members :-)

I have seriously reduced my time for WMF since holidays (for the kids) 
started. Simply because they are at home :-)

I have on average from 2 to 4 speaking engagements or collaboration 
meeting per month (I refuse some). A speaking engagement may take one 
full day (rarely), usually 2 days, sometimes more. Of course, most 
speaking engagements require preparation time (in particular if you do 
not wish to simply forever repeat the same things :-)).
I could very naturally cut down on these, but the fact is there are some 
collaborations I wish we develop (in particular related to Africa, 
wikijunior etc), so I focus most of my presentations on these topics. 
Except when I am specifically asked, I generally try to let most 
conferences in France to french editors.

I removed my phone number in most places, so phone calls are finally 
dropping. Frankly, journalists calls generally are better answered. 
People screaming they are gonna sue us as well (I can smooth the issue 
on the phone). I think it is relevant I answer the phone for 
french-speaking requests. Nicolas Weeger, the french chapter chair also 
get a lot of them. It makes no sense to redirect these phone calls to 
Florida where no one speaks french. Future board member from english 
speaking countries will not have to do that, but if they are non 
english, they will likely have interviews, complains etc. Frequence for 
interviews is variable. Low times are 0 per week. High times may be a 
couple per day.

I have hardly done any OTRS thing in the past 3 weeks (Wikimania). I am 
the only board member left looking a bit at it. A couple of people are 
thank god helping. A new person was hired to help with the phone in 
Florida (apparently, she was not planned to help on OTRS). She resigned 
last week (during Wikimania). So, there is no employee on OTRS.
Someone to take care of this will be very valuable help. I intend to 
remind Brad about this need. I assume we could possibly hire part time 
someone from our community to give a hand with this.

By burst of time, I give some time to the special project committee (the 
only committee I chose to belong to). I followed up several projects 
over there and I was the one who made Nokia be the Wikimania sponsor. I 
am the chair of that committee for now. In the past weeks, I have to 
review the InstantCommons proposal and handle some of it with Oscar (the 
grant request). We also approved hosting the WiktionaryZ. There are the 
collaboration proposals, or business proposals to review. The big 
decisions all are the objects of resolutions I proposed to the board 
(and had to push them to vote on). I also am the one writing the 
committee report to the board (Angela may not have access to the wiki, 
all relevant topics were reported to the board and all decisions were 
presented to the board). This takes time.

And then, there is everything else. From hiring Brad to approving last 
technical purchase. Getting informed about the last potential serious 
legal concern, to complaining of lack of information from another 
committee. Asking financial or audit information to Michael and trying 
to settle down the composition of the Fundraising committee. Considering 
  whether I should pay myself the domain names renewal when Soufron 
credit card is failing :-) Trying to convince Brad that the polish 
chapter needs a logo agreement. And thinking of the potential flaws of 
our organisation, which could lead to damage for our mission. Whatever.
This takes a lot of time. Mostly, it is a huge mass of information or 
request flowing all the time. Whether you want it or not, you get it.
What would be fabulous would be to avoid getting all that information, 
but only summaries. Or reports about what we need to know. This is not 
how things are really working right now. We are flooded with information 
all the time. Each time I leave home for a couple of days, I am snowed 
under emails. Should we have all this ? Probably not. A lot should be 
Brad or other staff people job. A lot could be done by others. Board 
members should also get more specialised. But hell; we are not a 
professional organisation. We are learning :-)


   In the case of Ant she has stated on the mailing
> lists that her phone number is on the net and she spends time
> answering 10 phone calls a day none of which require a board member
> (and frankly none of which need to be answered at all).  She also says
> she spends a lot of time on OTRS.  Looking at
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution_OTRS, there has
> apparently been a board resolution (as of May 26, 2006) to hire
> someone to take care of this.  It's unclear to me whether or not
> someone has yet been hired to do so.

Not to take care of OTRS. There is not employee yet as of today (and 
yes, the resolution was taken in may. No comment).

> When I hear Ant say she spends so much of her time doing these little
> jobs that could easily be handled by an employee making a minimal
> salary (if not by a volunteer making nothing), and then I look at
> about a million dollar annual budget with half of it being spent on
> capital expenditures, what else am I supposed to think?

...

> You say that there is a big need for the WMF board to spend a lot of
> time on organizational matters.  What is it that you think the board
> *needs* to do?

To voluntarily stop doing some of the stuff they do.

If everything goes on fine, they had no reason to do it before
If things really fail, then it might be sufficient to prove there is a 
problem to fix


> Anthony
> 
> On 8/12/06, GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>Hoi,
>>There is a big difference between how "it should" and "how it is". For all
>>kinds of reasons, there is a big NEED and EXPECTATION that a WMF board
>>member spends a lot of time on the organisational matters of the board. Not
>>only is there the need to communicate in order to come to the strategy of
>>the foundation, it is also expected that board members are part of
>>committees and play an active part in these. I have heard horror stories
>>where board members were denied access to information of "committees" and it
>>is therefore understandable that these invisible organisational units are
>>considered to operate in stealth mode.
>>
>>At this moment the organisation is very much in flux. Not only has Angela
>>decided to quit, Brad is finding his way in the murky dealings of the WMF
>>organisation, the committees pronounce very much that they are only starting
>>to get going. To top it off, many of the current people who are up for
>>election for the board are manifestly unsuited to the task because of their
>>narrow minded platform.
>>
>>When it is said that a board member only needs to spend "only" a few hours a
>>week on this function, the reality is very much ignored. By expressing that
>>this "should be the case" and by not indicating what needs to be done to
>>make this happen, I am afraid that false expectations are raised. At this
>>time, being a board member seems to be the kind of activity that eats up all
>>the time that you can throw at it. It has relatively little to do with any
>>one project and as Anthere says, it is hard work for little recognition.
>>
>>I wish all future board members well, but I hope that none are chosen
>>because of their ideas on how the English Wikipedia can be improved. They do
>>not understand what is needed.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>    GerardM
>>
>>On 8/12/06, Anthony <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
>>
>>>On 8/11/06, Erik Zachte <erikzachte at infodisiac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Anthere quit/lost (no idea which) her job while being a board member, as
>>>
>>>she
>>>
>>>>professed publicly some time ago, so I can quote that. She also told she
>>>>works nearly full time on the project and given her omnipresence, this
>>>
>>>might
>>>
>>>>well be an understatement. I think we should be grateful she is putting
>>>
>>>so
>>>
>>>>much time in the project. And I am sure everyone is. But maybe we ought
>>>
>>>to
>>>
>>>>taken a moment to discuss the consequences.
>>>>
>>>
>>> > If I remember correctly Anthere responded to a question from the
>>>audience.
>>>
>>>>Candid as she always is, she explained her financial situation (again).
>>>
>>>So I
>>>
>>>>feel I can comment on that some more.
>>>>
>>>>I don't know many mothers with three young children who can afford to
>>>
>>>spend
>>>
>>>>so much time pro bono. Of course there must be more Wikimedians in a
>>>
>>>similar
>>>
>>>>situation, who show as much commitment. Still I feel the organisation
>>>
>>>has a
>>>
>>>>special obligation towards its official representatives. If only people
>>>
>>>who
>>>
>>>>are financially independent can afford to work for the organisation in
>>>>central positions, and others do it to their own detriment, I think the
>>>>organisation (not on purpose but still) puts a bias on its central
>>>
>>>workforce
>>>
>>>>which is unwanted. These issues have been discussed before. But we have
>>>>grown from a small village to a large city, and our budget has increased
>>>>with it. We can even afford to delay fundraisers so it is not that we
>>>
>>>are
>>>
>>>>entirely unable to even discuss this due to lack of funds. Brad
>>>
>>>commented to
>>>
>>>>this effect.
>>>>
>>>>I have no idea how other non profit organisations handle this, but
>>>
>>>frankly I
>>>
>>>>think we should make up our own mind.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Well, I think we should follow the lead of other non-profit organizations.
>>>
>>>Being a board member shouldn't require a lot of time - a couple hours
>>>a week at the most.  If a board member wants to spend more time
>>>voluntarily, that's fine.  But if someone wants to spent 40 hours a
>>>week helping Wikimedia, and isn't in a financial position to do that
>>>for free, and Wikimedia agrees to pay them for this, then they
>>>shouldn't be a board member.  It's too much of a potential for a
>>>conflict of interest.
>>>
>>>I don't mean to say this as though it's a simple change to make.  But
>>>it's extremely important that the change be made.
>>>
>>>Anthony
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>foundation-l mailing list
>>>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>foundation-l mailing list
>>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>