[Foundation-l] thoughts on leakages

[Jussi-Ville Heiskanen]

On 1/11/08, Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org> wrote:
> On Jan 10, 2008 11:13 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > And (also by the text of the minutes that is published - seems there are
> some
> > edits there that are discussing later developements rather than what
> transpired
> > at the meeting itself; which is probably illustrative in a positive
> > fashion, even
> > though it confuses the text of the minutes as a document of a specific
> event)
> > specifically Erik was tasked with drafting the resolution; which after
> inquiring
> > with Mike, (someone, not clear who) decided that it was a bylaws matter,
> not
> > a resolution matter.
> >
> Well, it would make no sense as a resolution matter to ban former
> employees from becoming board members (for a certain period of time
> following their employment).  The board has to have a majority vote to
> install new board members anyway, so that same majority could just
> repeal the resolution.  To have any effectiveness at all this would
> have to be in the bylaws.

*cough*(bullshit)*cough*

The board willy nilly reversing itself is not something really likely to
happen, so resolutions do have force, if only the force of making
the board look like a dancing fool, when it keeps twisting and
turning...


>
> That said, the opposite move, banning former board members from
> becoming employees (for a certain period of time following their board
> membership), would at least have some effect as a resolution, as it
> would at least bar such things from happening without the explicit
> approval of the board.
>
> > If there has been a subsequent decision to not implement the voted on
> > decision even as a bylaws change, that is regrettably in the utmost. A
> real
> > step backwards in clarifying things between the roles of staff and board.
> >
> Well, I think the recent events have shown that such a bylaws change
> would hinder the ability of the Foundation to structure itself most
> efficiently, so I'd say such a change of view would be fortunate,
> rather than regrettable.  OTOH, I haven't heard any of the board
> members, or even Erik himself, say that their view on this rule has
> changed.

I think the recent events have shown nothing. The future will provide
good proven evaluations of how efficient the structuring has been. The
proof of the pudding is very much in the eating yet.


It would be very nice indeed if the people responsible would make sure
that the bylaws are amended in the appropriate way though, so we are
spared farces like this, down the road.

--
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]