Frankly, I think such views are naive idealism. There is a political
reality that would come about as a result of such a change, one at the
highest level, that need to be understood and addressed. I do not even
believe that this is a discussion that should occur at the community level.
This is a discussion that should occur at the board level.
A former Wikimedian in Residence was recently blocked for constant
copyright violations on the English Wikipedia. I do not want such people
voting on a body which will determine their level of monetary and
non-monetary support---especially now that the requirements for
incorporation as a user-group are dipping still lower.
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Marc A. Pelletier <m...@uberbox.org>
> On 15-04-22 11:54 AM, Sydney Poore wrote:
> > I fully support allowing our talented and dedicated WMF staff to have the
> > opportunity to choose the people who guide the direction of the WMF.
> I'd like to add to this that the (pretty small) set of staffers that
> would not otherwise have had eligibility to vote are generally in
> administrative, finance and legal positions - all of which bring other
> perspectives to evaluation of the candidates that may be valuable.
> But, more importantly, they share our values and commitment to the
> ideals behind the movement. They wouldn't be working at the Foundation
> if they didn't because our internal culture is - literally - all about
> the mission.
> Disclaimer: I'm staff myself, but eligible to vote as a volunteer.
> -- Marc
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: