Perhaps before people make random stabs in the dark about the nomination process this time around - which wasn't the old NomCom or any other former process - they might want to check the archives of this mailing list from late September or early October when candidates and nominations were solicited, and further follow-up emails about this time's process.
Risker On 10 January 2016 at 21:18, Milos Rancic <mill...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:37 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak <dar...@alk.edu.pl> > wrote: > > I can, however, generally add that we have not collected any nominations > > from our donors, if this helps. > > I can confirm this, as I am sure nothing has changed since NomCom > existence in relation to this issue, except updating the list with the > new names and maybe removing some of those proved to be controversial > (optionally, they are removing controversial ones every time the > process starts). > > NomCom failed mostly because of that list. However, Sue's idea to use > HR agency turned out to be the best solution, as we got Bishakha. > (Note for the future: use HR agency; they do the job better than you; > they are professionals.) > > Although I never had particular information, it's obvious that the > list is mostly consisted of Jimmy's network. That's not necessary bad > per se. Jimmy has the best connections inside of the Board and while > some of the names if selected would trigger demonstration in front of > the WMF office, it is possible to find good names inside of that list. > However, again, HR agency would do much better job, as they are not > dilettantes. > > There is one more thing in favor of Jimmy. Inside of the relations and > structure as it's now, Wikimedia movement should thank him for keeping > the integrity of WMF inside of the sea full of barracudas, sharks and > orcas. There were and are numerous worse scenarios than we have now > and people don't tend to think about them. That's independent of how > vocal he is here or anywhere else. > > I want to say it's not about CoI, as mentioned here numerous times. > Jimmy and the other Board members from the community (not elected by, > but from the community; Alice is from the community, too) are not > corrupted for sure and they are majority. It's normal to suggest the > best possible options for your organization if you are able to do > that. Arnnon Geshuri would be strong reinforcement to the Board if > there is no that serious investigation against him. > > Board members are not corrupted, but the system is. We see now how > serious mistakes could pass because of that. > > That small number of people heavily depend on virtues of every > particular Board member. One of that is long-term institutional > memory, which, with the exception of Jimmy, we likely don't have for a > year or more. I know Stu wanted to leave Board years ago. I also know > Jan-Bart wanted to leave Board at the end of 2014. It's questionable > to me how strong they were involved into the selection process (also, > Stu's Yahoo background could be inhibiting to him to say anything > against candidates of Google background). This situation could have > been avoided if we had pedantic Wikipedian with OCD inside of the > Board, but it turns out that we don't have one. > > I could imagine the process of selecting the candidates: > > Committee: > - Ideal Board member has to be a woman from a developing country. > - Oh, but see this guy! I never heard about him, but he's working for > Tesla and he was working for Google! Wow! > - OK, the second one then has to be for sure a woman and from a > developing country. > - We have a woman! > - From developing country? > - No. > - OK, it's fair enough. We did the job. Jan-Bart and Stu are pretty > angry as they had to be inside of the Board for one more year. > - True. We don't have time anymore. Done. > > Board: > - Dariusz: We have two candidates! > - Stu: Wow, such great candidates! -- while thinking "OMG, Arnnon! He > approached our HR to make some business with us, but our HR was too > drunk to talk with him. Whatever, they promised me I am leaving at the > end of December, so it's not my job anymore." > - Jan-Bart: Great, may I leave now? Patricio is chair, you don't need > me anymore! Hohoho! Oh, I have to vote? OK, I am voting! > - Jimmy: Perfect! -- while thinking "Oh, Arnnon! He is such a nice > guy! I talked to him on Eric Schmidt's yacht. He knows a lot about > wines! ... Hmm... I remember Paul Allen told me something about him... > Never mind, he was just jealous because I am more often on Eric's > yacht. Besides that, I completely forgot what's that about. Nothing > serious, I am sure." > - Patricio: OK. Who will write the statement? My English is not perfect. > - Alice: Guy, he is Japanese! > > I don't think this will be an issue for a long time. I think it's > clear to Arnnon himself that he is definitely controversial to us. > However, the pressure, lack of long-term institutional memory and > small number of persons in the Board tend to create an open field for > dilettantism. > > On the other hand, I am sure that we could find relevant place for > every non-controversial Jimmy's friend willing to contribute to our > movement. I would like to see, for example, Richard Branson inside of > Wikimedia movement, helping us to create Enterprise. And I am serious. > We have to be bold and we have to be friends with other bold people. > OK, maybe not Enterprise, but Stanford Torus inside of the Earth's > orbit would do the job, as well :) > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimediaemail@example.com Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>