[Wikimedia-l] Democratizing the Wikimedia Foundation
Federico Leva (Nemo)
nemowiki at gmail.com
Sat Nov 3 15:02:31 UTC 2012
Anders Wennersten, 03/11/2012 15:32:
> I do no understand.
> If they have a "rubberstamping hall appearance" who is then perceived
> as having the power to decide. And do you mean the preparation process
> is so excellent so no direct action is needed by the Board (which I
> would take to be the ultimate sign of a well functioning democracy)
> what is then the issue at hand in this thread?
"Democratizing the Wikimedia Foundation", in my opinion, means making
the board stronger, not weaker. In two ways:
1) "more power" (i.e. a greater impact in its actions; not discretionary
power for the sake of it) to a well functioning collegial body, which
acts clearly and transparently and is accountable for its decisions,
means more democracy, not less;
2) "more democracy" in the board and the WMF in general would mean a
greater legitimacy/ability to take important decisions and have a bigger
impact, i.e. "more power".
Of course this assumes that increasing democracy relative to the current
situation is good, but we need to start from something (that's why the
subject of this thread is a productive premise).
Given the audience, there are also other major assumptions on legitimacy
sources, as Nathan hinted, and in particular that wikimedians have
something to say, that power doesn't legitimate itself and that "dollar
voting" by donors is not a source of legitimacy.... but that would bring
us too far.
 Maybe less anarchy.
More information about the Wikimedia-l