2009/8/28 Anthony <[email protected]>: > I think the main valid reason is that it's kind of rude to ask someone like > Halprin to commit a certain portion of his quite valuable time to the > project, absolutely free, and not to even allow him one board vote (out of > what, 10 now?).
I don't see why. I donate lots of my time to the project and don't get any board votes. I would hope (and assume) he took the seat because he supports the cause not because he is power hungry. > I'd rather see a system for experts where "the community" (with a better > definition than just whoever makes X edits) ratifies the nominees made by > the nomination committee, or at least one where "the community" has the > power to remove members. But I'd rather see the Wikimedia Foundation as a > membership organization... So whatever. That is an interesting idea. A ratification process wouldn't be too difficult logistically and would help keep the real power in the hands of the community, where it should be. The WMF as a membership organisation would be great, but I don't think it is practical. A better option (which I have discussed with a few poeple) would be having the chapters as members of the WMF and the community as members of the chapters. There are other global non-profits that work along those lines. (The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, for example.) _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
