He isn't asking Dariusz to leave the board, but the position of chair of
a particular committee on it. While I have no idea if this is called for
either, it seems an important distinction.
On 03/05/16 04:23, Anthony Cole wrote:
Fae, I can see no reason for Dariusz to leave the board. He
That Dariusz is willing to engage with the community is very positive. The
issues that occurred around the selecting of Arnnon are complicated and I
agree with Dariusz were more systemic in nature. I do not see the movement
as being well served by him stepping down.
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at
Fae, I can see no reason for Dariusz to leave the board. He seems to be
decent and intelligent. The Arnnon thing was an error but it was clearly
part of a broader problem. Yes, they all need training but that seems to be
in the works. I hope he stays, and is re-elected if he chooses to run next
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:21 AM, Fæ wrote:
With regard to "[the WMF board] delivering services that are of a high
> quality", all the metrics that the WMF report show the opposite. The
> WMF consistently fail to meet the performance targets they set for
> themselves, as
> That's great. Please do the right thing and take the initiative to
> step down from the volunteer position of chair, so that someone with a
> history of excellent judgment on trustee governance can take the
Again, *you* may think it's a good idea. I regard Dariusz to be one of
We have had a rough patch where management and people in the WMF were at
odds. We have a rough patch where people for all kinds of reason decide to
no longer be a member of the WMF board. It is no wonder that things are not
as they should be as a consequence. When you add the
>1. Re: Crisis of Confidence (Dariusz Jemielniak)
>2. Re: Crisis of Confidence (Fæ)
>3. Re: What New Thing is WMF Doing w. Cookies, & Why is Legal
> Involved? (Pete Forsyth)
On 2 May 2016 at 15:17, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote:
>> Am I right that you were the chair of the governance committee
>> responsible for recommending Arnnon to the board and that you are
>> still in that position? Why are you still involved in the governance
>> process if
Thank you for continuing to engage with the community.
Responding to highly critical voices in the movement is not fun.
Beside the highly critical voices on the mailing list, there are many
people who read this list and
appreciate communication from you.
From my perspective, Dariusz is committed to improving the governance of
Board. But, he is in a volunteer position, and is limited in the percentage
of his time that he can devote to WMF Board business.
Even if he personally was devoting 60 hours a week to reforming the Board,
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Fæ wrote:
> Your email fits perfectly with my description of the WMF board: "have
> not apologized or even changed a single part of their governance
> processes, despite vague unmeasurable offers to look into it."
I'm not sure if it is typical
Your email fits perfectly with my description of the WMF board: "have
not apologized or even changed a single part of their governance
processes, despite vague unmeasurable offers to look into it." After
many months there is no *commitment* to a date for any change to
02.05.2016 5:22 AM "Fæ" napisał(a):
> Perhaps we could stick to facts?
> In the very recent case of Arnnon Geshuri, the WMF board of trustees
> proved themselves to be completely out of touch with the
> community. 314 Wikimedians took part in the vote of no
Perhaps we could stick to facts?
In the very recent case of Arnnon Geshuri, the WMF board of trustees
proved themselves to be completely out of touch with the
community. 314 Wikimedians took part in the vote of no
confidence, hardly just "malcontents", and 95% of those that took part
The most important thing about the board and the WMF is that they enable
what we do. The dependence on them delivering services that are of a high
quality is something they deliver. At the same time there is a coterie of
"Wikipedians" that want to remake the WMF in their own image. They have
It seems that the engagement between the Board and the Community has broken
down, to the point that there may be a crisis of confidence developing.
Perhaps members of this list would care to express their views at
Mail list logo