Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubric

2020-10-22 Thread Benjamin Lees
The original email here said "We welcome your input through 26 October." I don't think a three-week comment period was appropriate to begin with for a dramatic overhaul of our most formally powerful institution--particularly at a time when the board has determined elections need to be put on

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubric

2020-10-20 Thread Megan Wacha
;>> >>> -- Forwarded message ------ >>> From: Jimmy Wales >>> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>> Cc: >>> Bcc: >>> Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 05:12:55 +0100 >>> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for feedback about Wikime

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubric

2020-10-19 Thread Yuri Astrakhan
ture >> revision should explicitly include as much detail as is possible, >> and certainly should mandate elections. >> >> -- Forwarded message -- >> From: Jimmy Wales >> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> Cc: >> Bcc: >> Date:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubric

2020-10-19 Thread Brion Vibber
t; -- Forwarded message -- > From: Jimmy Wales > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 05:13:08 +0100 > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation > Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubric >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubric

2020-10-13 Thread Asaf Bartov
-- From: Jimmy Wales To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Cc: Bcc: Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 05:12:55 +0100 Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubric On 10/7/20 6:32 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: The replacement of an explicit voting

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubric

2020-10-08 Thread Samuel Klein
Excellent points, Yair, I hadn't noticed that. (which suggests the page showing proposed changes can be more clear) Perhaps it would make more sense to do this in two stages: 1) Set a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubric

2020-10-07 Thread Yair Rand
I am alarmed. While the page on Meta page on the bylaws changes highlights only additions, a direct comparison with the current bylaws shows some significant deletions. Some issues: * The line "(G) Board Majority. A majority of the Board Trustee positions, without counting the Community Founder

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubric

2020-10-07 Thread Samuel Klein
The replacement of an explicit voting process with an unspecified process + schedule seems unnecessarily vague. Especially since the current ElecComm does not seem to have been party to the decisions around this year's delay. Drawing from the current Bylaws language, it would be better to add

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubric

2020-10-07 Thread Nathan
Hi Nataliia, I imagine the board went through an evaluation process - perhaps with the assistance of non-profit governance experts - to help guide the board as to the appropriate size given the board's function, research about the effectiveness of corporate boards at different sizes, etc. Can you

[Wikimedia-l] Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubric

2020-10-07 Thread Nataliia Tymkiv
Dear all, Today the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees starts two calls for feedback: on changes to our Bylaws[1] mainly to increase the Board size from 10 to 16 members, and on a trustee candidate rubric[2] to introduce new, more effective ways to evaluate new board candidates. These