[Foundation-l] Omidyar Network Commits $2 Million Grant to Wikimedia Foundation

[Kropotkine_113]

Le mercredi 26 août 2009 à 22:44 +0200, Ting Chen a écrit :
> Hello Kropotkine_113,


Hello Ting,


> since I am on the NomCom I will answer your questions.
> 
> Kropotkine_113 wrote:
> > Has Matt Halprin been designated to the Board by the Nominating Commitee
> > (NOMCOM) ? This is explicity required if I read correctly this page :
> > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees/Restructure_Announcement_Q%26A
> >   
> This is not correct. Essentially the NomCom should nominate the board 
> members, and should do this at the end of last year. But it didn't 
> worked out. There are multiple reasons for that. Basically that was the 
> first time that we worked how it can work and how not. We are simply 
> lack of experience. So, it didn't work out last winter. We should have 
> four nominated candidates appointed to the board by the begin of 2009 
> but we had only two by that time. According to the bylaw of the 
> Foundation IV 6 the board can appoint trustees because of vacancy, this 
> is the case. So Matt was not on the NomCom list. But we had informed the 
> NomCom though about this process. After Wikimania the NomCom would 
> resume its work and make suggestions for next year. So Matt would be 
> included by NomCom in its list that it would suggest to the board by 
> December or would drop out.


Ok. It would be interesting to explain that more explicitely somewhere
(on meta or on wikimediafoundation's wiki) because It was not so obvious
(or I didn't understain...) when I read the Q&A page I mentionned.


> > Does he fulfill the Nomitanig Commitee selection criterion : "Membership
> > in the Wikimedia community" ?
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Nominating_Committee/Selection_criteria#General_needed_traits
> >
> > Where is the list of the other candidates designated by the NOMCOM ?
> >   
> The list of NomCom is not published because of privacy. It is a very 
> simple thing. If someone is suggested on the list and he is not selected 
> or he declined, in either cases can it can both be embarassing for the 
> person as well as for the Foundation. So the NomCom had decided on its 
> first meeting that the list would not be published and should be kept 
> confidential. This would also be the case for the coming years.


Ok.


> > Could we see the discussions and the recommandations of the nominating
> > commitee ?
> >   
> Because of the nature of the confidenciality of the NomCom the 
> discussion are kept internal. But there are meeting minutes and the 
> mailing list is archived. The NomCom published a status report which is 
> published here: [1]


Ok.


> > Is it possible to know which member of the Board of Trustees agree this
> > appointment ? Or at least juste the repartition support/against in the
> > Board ?
> >   
> The discussion about this assignment and the voting about it would be 
> published as one of the topics of the August board meeting. I want to 
> respect the secratory offices role here and don't make any announcements 
> prior of Kat's publication of the minutes. What I can say at this point 
> is that I voted for Matt for the following reasons: First of all Jimmy 
> and Michael interviewed and talked with Matt. Both of them had 
> recommended him as a valuable plus for the board. The board had 
> interviewed Matt in Buenos Aires, had discussed all the problems that 
> may be raised or values that may be added. According of all these 
> evaluations I feel no problem as voting for him. We worked with Matt in 
> Buenos Aires during our strategic planning session and I feel that our 
> positive evaluation was confirmed as Matt had inputted a lot of insights 
> out of his experiences about procedures and measurements of success.


Thank you for all these explanations and for wasting your time to
answer.


> Ting

Kropotkine_113