On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 5:21 PM, John Mark Vandenberg jayvdb@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 4:48 PM, Gergő Tisza gtisza@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Fae,
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 1:14 PM, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
Not tricky at all. There are *plenty* of other similar organizations that have elections for their trustees to their boards, including several Wikimedia chapters/affiliates where their boards have oversite of many employees and significant sums of money.
can you share a few examples of organizations where board members are appointed in a binding election and members of the electorate do not have to identify themselves to the organization?
Or are you suggesting that the WMF should turn into a membership organization and Wikimedians who are unwilling to share personally identifying information with the WMF should not be allowed to vote?
I dont see how the voting method is particularly relevant to this thread..? It seems this thread is more about governance by post-appointment trustees, who have been properly vetted before being appointed.
I dont recall that we've had any serious incidents of the board election outcome being disrupted because we use a voting process that includes non-identified people.
i.e. I think we , the community, selected *three* **great** Trustees in the last community election, and the issues that caused us to loose two of them are post-appointment and we should be looking into the governance post-appointment to prevent it happening again.