[Foundation-l] Opinions/suggestions for "outside" members of the board?

[Anthony DiPierro]

On 6/19/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/19/06, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
> > I gave a brief explanation of what I think Erik is talking about wrt
> > Larry Lessig.  For an example of the dispute, see also
> > http://intelligentdesigns.net/blog/?p=25
>
> So you believe Erik opposed Lessig for being pragmatic enough to
> believe that there is a place in the world for unfree but not
> outrageously limited content?
>
I won't speak for Erik, but I've read enough by Lessig to know that
his philosophy on this matter goes well beyond mere pragmatism.
Lessig doesn't just recognize that he lives in a world with unfree
content, that's the world he wants to live in.

> I'd hope that Lessig would realize that "free as in beer" media is
> already done rather well by NPR, and that while there is a place in
> the world for unfree things, that place isn't Wikimedia.   I'd hope
> so, and nothing from my limited conversations with him has suggested
> otherwise...  It would seem to be rather disrespectful to dismiss him
> on the basis of such presumptions.
>
I don't think he should be dismissed completely.  I just don't think
it's appropriate to put him on the governing board, especially a
strong governing board with essentially no limits on its power,
without the community first getting to know him, within the context of
Wikimedia, a lot more.

> > His problem with Mitch Kapor seems clear.  For more background see
> > [[Mozilla Corporation]].
> >
> > I'm not sure what his problem with RMS and Eben Moglen are.
>
> As above these people have a proven track record and substantial
> experience.  They may hold some views which are incompatible, but we
> can't know that based on assumptions and our own criticisms related to
> circumstances which are vastly different from our own...

And that is precisely why I don't think it's a good idea to put
outsiders on the governing board in the first place.

> It's clear
> that they all have vision and  experience which could benefit us, and
> a proven trackrecord to back up their claims.   It's not like anyone
> is discussing handing them board seats without discussion.
>
If you think there's going to be a public announcement that X is being
considered for appointment to the board, and that the community now
has a chance to interview the candidate and see how well he or she
fits in with Wikimedia, I think you're sadly mistaken.  I'm under the
assumption that this *is* that discussion.  It seems to be going about
similar to the discussion over who to name as the chief executive.

> > These people don't bring particularly different perspectives to the
> > organization, but I do think their input is useful, because they
> > represent some of the most influential people with regard to those
> > perspectives.  I'd love to have RMS and Larry Lessig battling it out
> > on this mailing list over how best to implement Wikimedia project
> > copyright policies (with Eben Moglen presenting his own opinions as to
> > how best to implement these policies).  But I think it's pretty
> > obvious that they're already invited to do so.
>
> Presumably they aren't here arguing on the list because they are busy
> getting something done. :)
>
I would think, considering your participation in this discussion, that
engaging in open dialogue with the goal of determining the right thing
to do is often just as useful as actually doing it.

> > Unfortunately I don't know much about Mitch Kapor.  But given what I
> > do know I would love to hear his input on how best to bring
> > sustainable revenue to the foundation.  This doesn't mean I know
> > enough to say he should be given a vote.
>
> Absolutely, I don't know enough either. But I know enough not to
> dismiss them off hand...
>
Maybe I've done that, and if so I guess I shouldn't have.  But I
repeat the question asked by others in this thread.  What is the
purpose of putting one of these people on the board in the first
place?  What is the purpose that isn't served equally by some other
position?

Anthony