[Wikimedia-l] Transparency of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

2. While I understand that some Board conversations are best held in private, for example conversations involving attorney-client privilege, I continue to believe that there is a misalignment between the democratic and open-source values of the Wikimedia movement and the limited information that the community is provided about WMF Board deliberations. There seems to be an assumption that full and honest discussions are best held behind closed doors so that people in the room feel comfortable with voicing their opinions. It seems to me that this is a doctrine which is contrary to the values of our movement, and I would urge the Board to change its approach. I would also note that many jurisdictions in the United States have laws requiring government bodies like city councils and legislatures to have their meetings in full view of the public unless there is a specific exemption for a subject that is to be discussed in private. These governments, in many cases, continue to function effectively despite the public and sensitive nature of deliberations on topics like budgets, land use planning, environmental regulations, appointments of judges, service contracts, and allegations of misconduct against fellow elected officials. The WMF Board should be a model of openness and good governance. Now is a good time for the Board to take meaningful steps toward aligning itself with our collective values.