On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Christophe Henner
wrote:
>
>
> 2. Time comitment. So on that, we are actively working on trying to reduce
> the mandatory time board members have to allocate to WMF. Goal is between
> this year and next year to lower it down to what we benchmarked as average
> (and
Christophe,
Thanks for the comments.
I think of WMF Board membership as being similar to ENWP Arbcom or some
event committee memberships in the sense that doing the roles well often
seems to require a near-martyrdom level of commitment. I'd like to see some
ceilings on workloads for volunteers, a
Christophe
Thanks for that. You write
we are actively working on trying to reduce
> the mandatory time board members have to allocate to WMF. Goal is between
> this year and next year to lower it down to what we benchmarked as average
> (and I can't find the number again, I'll dig into that).
Hey,
Many topics covered here :)
1. Paid vs. unpaid: I don't know of the legal situation, but I always felt
that for a NGO it is better to have a volunteer board. Especially for us as
our movement is built thanks to volunteers. I fear it would slightly hinder
our message if trustees were paid. Bu
Pine,
By the same argument, then, the Foundation should be compensating the
unpaid volunteers who actually create the content of the projects, and
supporting them with the tools and resources they need to do that work.
"Rogol"
On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 2:52 AM, Pine W wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> Two
Hi James,
Two points:
1. Intrinsic motivation, at this point, appears to be inadequate for
increasing the population of the Wikimedia volunteer community. I am
skeptical that we should rely on the same mechanism which isn't working in
the volunteer community to fill slots on the WMF Board, which
Thanks for this.
If anyone needs context -
There are 10 board seats
- The Wikimedia community of editors votes for 3, with all three seats open
by 13 August 2017 at latest (WMF sets election date, no date set for
election yet)
- There are 2 chapter selected seats
- Natalia above is talking about
Hello,
In the last community election a Google employee, a physician, and a
Harvard business professor were selected. These are all higher income
professions. There were a range of reasons for this, but one commonality to
note was that the people favored by the community also might have been
peopl
I disagree with the suggestion to pay members of the board. Payment does
not necessarily mean people will invest more time and a fair bit of
literature supports intrinsic motivation resulting in greater engagement
than extrinsic motivation. As most of our movement is not only composed of
volunteers
Pine,
It's unusual, and discouraged by the IRS (the United States' tax agency),
for board members to be paid. I won't get into details, but I think this is
a good thing, as it's tough to avoid conflict of interest when earning
money from an entity you're seeking to get funding for. You can read a
Hi Nataliia,
Thanks for the update. An issue that keeps coming to my mind is whether WMF
would get higher-quality Board candidates, and whether candidates would
devote more time to Wikimedia matters, if Board membership was treated as a
part-time job and paid accordingly. Many people who have the
11 matches
Mail list logo