On 13 March 2015 at 19:04, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > In general I think highly of Michelle, but this statement fits a > long-running pattern I percieve in WMF governance of the board being > deferential to the ED and staff. This goes back to Sue's tenure and > possibly longer. I feel that the Board should respectfully ask tough > questions about staff recommendations. Had the board done so, we might all > have been saved from the MediaViewer, VisualEditor, and other product > dramas because the Board would have been vigilant about project selection > and quality control. WMF needs an activist board. All of the guidance that > I read about boards in general says that good boards do due diligance, and > I would encourage the WMF board to be proactive and ask tough questions. > This can be done while maintaining a positive and respectful atmosphere.
I think you're completely incorrect here. Professional charities desperately need the separation, and being on the board of a professional-level nonprofit board is enough work. This sort of detailed overview of every initiative is precisely what a board needs to evolve the charity to *get away from*. - d. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimediaemail@example.com Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>