Hey Ben,
That is exactly what we have in mind. That is way during Wikimania I sent
an email about the board priorities for the on-going year (board
improvement, ED support, movement strategy).
Doing so doesn't mean we're ignoring anything that doesn't fall into one of
this priorities, but that
Thanks Christophe! I reviewed some of the earlier emails responding to the
June minutes and realized that Pine actually touched on this same topic
just a bit ago and as I recall Katherine gave a great overview of her
approach, so my apologies in bringing it up again so soon. No need to
respond to
Hi,
I love to write long emails, but four in a row would too much.
As said before we are taking up our leadership role.
The strategy process *is* a black box right now. We (Katherine mostly) have
been working on the process for a few weeks.
We will share soon I hope, the first part of that
Hey Pine,
The Wikimedia Endowment is specifically set up to
*"act as a permanent safekeeping fund to generate income to support the
operations and activities of the Wikimedia projects in perpetuity". [1]*
The Endowment acts as the online projects safety net. It will be
independent of the
Thanks Ben.
Just a few comments:
* The WMF Board has limited bandwidth, and they have a lot on their agenda
right now. I'm not sure how much of strategic work they can do while also
handling their other priorities, so some dependence on the ED is likely
necessary.
* Some members of the WMF
I was glad to see this detailed note of an important gap in search, but it
left me wondering how the board views its role in strategic planning?
TL;DR: top-level prioritization should be done in a more public and
transparent manner, probably with more board input
Historically, it seems like the
