[Foundation-l] Elections: a new board for the future

[Aphaia]

Having copying the reference for Jimbo and his term, I sort of felt weird.

I agree it is a contradiction someone is the "benevolunt dictator for
life" and a member with term at the same time.  However it could be
possible someone holds the title of "chair emeritus" for life and
serves the Board as a regular member with a term, at least in certain
circumstance.

On 6/18/07, Florence Devouard <Anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Walter Vermeir wrote:
> > Florence Devouard schreef:
> >
> >> Jimbo had indicated he would be willing to go for an elected seat next
> >> year. If so, he would liberate an appointed seat in june.
> >
> > Would it not be a better solution to just appoint Jimmy to the board for
> > live?
> >
> > As founder I find it would not be more then normal that he gets a
> > special arrangement.  Besides of that if he runs in the open election
> > the only result will be that gets elected by an absolute majority so
> > there is no point in doing that.
>
> I will respectfully disagree on this point.
>
> Being on a "governing" board is not just about getting a nice title and
> recognition. It  implies working, getting involved, assisting to
> meetings, helping on task forces.
>
> When a board member does nothing, it is detrimental to the organization.
> First because it uses a seat for no job being done, and second because
> since we operate with a voting system, with quorum, any board member
> becoming inactive is impairing the functionning of the whole
> organization. It paralyses it.
>
> For this reason, I am opposed to adding or keeping on the board anyone
> who becomes inactive. This is not the case of Jimbo right now, he still
> is pretty active on some topics, mostly helping with fundraising, and
> licenses issues. So I am fully happy that he is on the board. But if one
> day he becomes too busy with all his other duties, then he will have to
> let room to others. I know that he agrees with that.
>
>
> Beyond the question of activity/inactivity, I oppose Jimbo being
> appointed to the board for life, because in doing so, the message we
> give is that board members are not equal in decision, and that the way
> we operate is not democratic. Actually, it is pretty funny to read that
> we should still make some efforts to supposingly be more democratic
> (100% elected for example), and at the same time accept a sort of
> "dictator for life". Both are not really compatible :-) And it casts on
> board members a sort of shadow, making it more difficult to fight group
> thinking directed by one.
>
>
> Jimbo will always be Jimbo, the Foundator of Wikipedia. The day he quits
> the governing board, I presume he will join the advisory board anyway.
> Where he could well be member for life. Because I think he will advise
> the governing board for the rest of his life :-)
>
> Ant
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


-- 
KIZU Naoko
  Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org
  * habent enim emolumentum in labore suo *