[Foundation-l] Future Board election procedures and guidelines

[Delphine Ménard]

On 7/17/07, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/17/07, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 7/16/07, Brion Vibber <brion at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > > I definitely do not support this; it unnecessarily punishes community
> > > members who have become involved in the foundation's corporate
> > > operations without similarly punishing those who have been active in
> > > other ways (chapters, community projects, etc).
> >
> > Oscar resigned from his position as head of the Dutch chapter when he
> > joined the Board; Frieda will not stand for the presidency of the
> > Italian chapter again in November. This is not a "punishment", it is
> > simply a clear separation of roles that helps to avoid conflicts of
> > interest in many decision-making processes where chapters are
> > involved.
>
>
> Indeed, that is quite on point, but not in they way you think. There is
> no suggestion offered, nor do I think there will be, that people involved
> in chapter governance not run for the board of trustees, untill having
> been separated from that role for a year...

And there shouldn't be any such suggestion. Candidates running for
board positions are asked what their previous involvement with
non-profits was, chapters are in the large majority acting as
non-profits, I believe it makes no difference whether someone runs for
the board of the Wikimedia Foundation with an experience in being part
of Wikimedia chapter governance or SOS Children governance. Also,
would one prevent the CEO of <insert  name of NGO here> to run for a
position in the board of the Foundation? I don't think so. Please
remember that Wikimedia Chapters and Wikimedia Foundation are
independant organisations. Being involved in the politics of one does
not necessarily meain being involved in the politic of the other.

Back to the subject at hand, as one of those that this change in
policy would effect, and although I understand Brion's point, I tend
to agree with Jan-Bart and Erik, and especially Michael Snow's
suggestion of a six months cooling off (Andrew's word) between an
employee leaving the Foundation and their running for the board. It
might seem awkward for those of us who are already "in", as it would
yet come as something we didn't think about when we signed in to get
the job, but I do believe that it is a good firewall between board
governance and everyday executive matters, by providing on both parts
(that of the organisation and that of the individual), a little time
to put things in perspective.


Delphine

-- 
~notafish
NB. This address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent to
this address will probably get lost.