"For cause" can mean a lot of things - everything from getting drunk and plowing in to a crowd to embezzling money, to simply holding consistently different opinions than the rest of the board and continually voicing them. We won't know much more until the board statement (although, again, I'm surprised comms weren't pre-prepped,) but this is a really surprising situation, and I really hope the board makes a clear statement that justifies the removal beyond a shadow of a doubt.
On Wednesday, December 30, 2015, Robert Rohde rarohde@gmail.com wrote:
Jimbo, on his talk page, says this was a removal "for cause", and that he expects the whole Board will provide a further statement.
-Robert Rohde
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 12:03 AM, Kevin Gorman <kgorman@gmail.com javascript:;> wrote:
As far as I can tell, no one alleges Doc James did anything wrong - if there were serious allegations of wrongdoing then, for one thing, I have trouble seeing Dariusz as having supported James staying on the board.
The
board *can* remove members for any reason, but if you're removing one member elected - and generally quite trusted - from the board, and that removal is opposed by *another* community elected board member, there better be a damned good reason behind it - board *can* ignore the will of two of the three directly elected trustees, but doing so without a damn good reason is a significant error. To be honest, since the motion to remove James was clearly prepared in advance, I'm pretty surprising that board didn't ask WMF comms for help preparig to deal with the fall-out. I've been told by multiple sets of people that this doesn't involve allegations of wrongdoing against James - but if it does, that needs to
be
quickly communicated, as James holds multiple other positions of trust in the Wikimedia movement. And if doesn't involve allegations of wrongdoing by James... well to be honest, I have a hard time seeing a situation
where
the removal of James (a community elected trustee) which was opposed by Dariusz (another community elected trustee) is reasonably justifiable. Without more details about the situation, it really reads like a board
out
of touch with the community it is intended to serve.
Unless an extraordinarily good reason is produced (like James regularly shouting things Cluebot would censor in the middle of meetings,) I would hope that the board would consider reinstating James... and spending the time to learn how to work with with a respected and accomplished Wikipedian. Doc James is one of the most active contributors to Wikiproject Medicine, is a long time former president of Wikimedia Canada and the Wiki Project Med Foundation, and has done a ton of other wiki-stuff. It's hard to see him as a detriment to the WMF board, and
it's
concerning that the first time the WMF board has ever felt the need to remove a member it was a member as awesome a human being and Wikimedian
as
James.
Best, KG -sent from mobile.
On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Nathan <nawrich@gmail.com
javascript:;> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 3:25 PM, olatunde isaac <
reachout2isaac@gmail.com javascript:;>
wrote:
I'm very disappointed to know that the board meeting was still
ongoing
as
at the time James revealed that he was ejected from the board. It is
a
silly idea! Perhaps he felt the community can stop the meeting or
override
the decision of the board of trustee. The WMF BoT is not a parliament
where
the house do not have the veto power to remove an elected member. Section 7 (remover) of the WMF's bylaws clearly stipulated that “Any Trustee may be removed, with or without cause, by a majority
vote
of
the Trustees then in office in accordance with the procedures set
forth
in
Section 617.0808(1), or other relevant provisions of the Act”. Based
on
this bylaw, James remover is justified! I understand that majority of the community members who elected James
are
likely not to be aware of this provisions but James is aware of it
and
will
probably have an answer to (1) the reason for his remover (2) why his remover was supported by eight members and (3) why the third community-elected trustee, Denny Vrandečić, lost confidence supported
his
removal. The fact that James never stated the reasons why he was ejected from
the
board as at the time he disclosed his remover is worrisome. James, I'm sorry if I'm too factual here.
Best,
Olatunde Isaac. Sent from my BlackBerry wireless device from MTN
He didn't use his phone to mail to the list while sitting in a
meeting...
He was dismissed from the board and then ejected from the board
meeting.
After he left the room as ordered, he posted the notification. We don't know all the precise circumstances, but I couldn't guarantee I wouldn't have done the same in his place. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; ?subject=unsubscribe>