Denny, with all due respect, I think you have things backwards.

"committed to Wikimedia Foundation’s goal to establish and maintain the
highest level of public confidence in its accountability"

Your interpretation seems to be "committed to Wikimedia Foundation".  But
you need to read that whole sentence.  The *goal* of the Foundation, to
maintain the highest level of public confidence, is the important part.
This goal can be threatened by members of the Foundation, and defended by
members of the movement at large.  Which is what's happening right now, and
which is why your interpretation is met with such disagreement.

"In every instance in which I represent the Wikimedia Foundation, I will
conduct my activities in a manner to best promote the interests of
Wikimedia Foundation."

Again, the *interests* of the Foundation, not the Foundation itself.
Which, again, are threatened by this crisis.

I hope this has just been a temporary lapse in understanding that you are
suffering from due to difficult times and elevated emotions.  But it's
clear that we need the board to protect the movement, which of course is
the *interest* and *goal* of the Foundation.

I am a relatively insignificant staff member, sure.  But still, I want to
say to the community at large that most of my friends and people I've
talked to are fully committed to the movement, and not to some abstract
useless loyalty to a Foundation that does not operate in the movement's
best interest.  But that does not mean that the crisis we face now is a
simple cut and dry problem.  The movement includes many voices that are not
heard on this list, and we have to think hard about how to account for all
those voices, and do the best thing for free and open knowledge.

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Andrea Zanni <>

> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Brion Vibber <>
> wrote:
> > What I will disagree on is with the notion that the board has to take the
> > org's side against the movement by definition. It is my understanding
> that
> > the board has the role of oversight of the org -- that is, it's the
> board's
> > job to ensure that the Foundation is effectively accomplishing the goals
> it
> > was created to perform.
> >
> As much as I agree with Brion,
> probably Denny's message is telling us a lot.
> I haven't read carefully the WMF Board Pledge of personal commitment, but
> this is not the first time this issue is discussed: see for example
> Cristian mail, two months ago, tackling the very specific thing. [1]
> Maybe the Board "feels" a lot of pressure about this, and this is a problem
> on itself.
> We all know that "toxicity" of an environment doesn't need laws or written
> rules, but people being people, social pressure, etc.
> If Board members feels without power, bound to the WMF and not the
> Movement, that's a real problem we need to look into.
> Aubrey
> [1]
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> New messages to:
> Unsubscribe:,
> <>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
New messages to:

Reply via email to