Here is a response to Denny's resignation; his email has been sticking to
me.   To provide some context for what follows, I work a lot on COI and
advocacy issues in Wikipedia, and worked on COI issues professionally at a
university for the past 15 years.

The limitations created by managing or eliminating Denny's various
conflicts of interest, appear to have been surprising to Denny, and were
definitely frustrating for him.

Surprising and frustrating.  This is perhaps the result of a lack of

The WMF might want to consider putting in place a system of disclosing and
managing conflicts of interest for Trustees, before they actually join the
board, so that conflict management issues are both clear and acceptable to
the new Trustee and the Board at the start.

The process could be the same as it is in many sectors -  a confidential
disclosure of relevant interests, identification of possible and perceived
conflicts between those interests and the obligations of a Trustee, and
then creation of a plan to manage those conflicts (and identification of
areas where the conflicts can't be managed but need to be eliminated by
recusal).  All done before the person actually joins the board.

Once the person joins, the relevant external interests could be disclosed
at the board member's profile on the WMF board webpage.  The additional
step of publishing an outline of the management plan (at the same location)
would be something very useful in light of the high value that WMF staff
and the movement places on transparency.

Please consider that.  And please pardon me if this is already done, but
something went awry with Denny.


On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Denny Vrandecic <>

> I exchanged a walk on part in the war for a lead role in the cage.
> I find myself tied and limited in my actions and projects. In order to
> avoid the perception or potential for Conflict of Interests I have to act
> extremely carefully in far too many parts of my life. Instead of being able
> to pursue my projects or some projects at work - which I think would align
> very well with our mission - I found myself trapped between too many
> constraints. I feel like I cannot offer my thoughts and my considerations
> openly, since they might easily be perceived as expressions of interests -
> regarding my previous work, regarding my friends, regarding my current
> employment.
> This hit home strongly during the FDC deliberations, where I had to deal
> with the situation of people deliberating a proposal written by my Best
> Man, around a project that has consumed the best part of the previous
> decade of my life. Obviously, I explained the conflicts in this case, and
> refrained from participating in the discussion, as agreed with the FDC.
> This hit home every time there was a topic that might be perceived as a
> potential conflict of interest between Wikimedia and my employer, and even
> though I might have been in a unique position to provide insight, I had to
> refrain from doing so in order not to exert influence.
> There were constant and continuous attacks against me, as being merely
> Google’s mole on the Board, even of the election being bought by Google. I
> would not have minded these attacks so much - if I would have had the
> feeling that my input to the Board, based on my skills and experiences,
> would have been particularly valuable, or if I would have had the feeling
> of getting anything done while being on the Board. As it is, neither was
> the case.
> I discussed with Jan-Bart, then chair, what is and what is not appropriate
> to pursue as a member of the Board. I understood and followed his advice,
> but it was frustrating. It was infuriatingly limiting.
> As some of you might know, Wikidata was for me just one step towards my
> actual goal, a fully multilingual Wikipedia. I hoped that as a Trustee I
> could pursue that goal, but when even writing a comment on a bug in
> Phabricator has to be considered under the aspect that it will be read as
> "it is a Board-member writing that comment" and/or “It’s a Googler writing
> that comment”, I don’t see how I could effectively pursue such a goal.
> It was at Wikimania 2006 in Boston, when Markus Krötzsch and I had lunch
> with Dan Connolly, a co-editor of the early HTML specs. Dan gave me an
> advise that still rings with me - to do the things worth doing that only
> you can do. This set me, back then, on a path that eventually lead to the
> creation of Wikidata - which, before then, wasn't something I wanted to do
> myself. I used to think that merely suggesting it would be enough - someone
> will eventually do it, I don’t have to. There’s plenty of committed and
> smart people at the Foundation, they’ll make it happen. Heck, Erik was back
> then a supporter of the plan (he was the one to secure the domain
>, and he was deputy director. Things were bound to happen
> anyway. But that is not what happened. I eventually, half a decade later,
> realized that if I do not do it, it simply won't happen, at least not in a
> reasonable timeframe.
> And as said, Wikidata was just one step on the way. But right now I cannot
> take the next steps. Anything that I would do or propose or suggest will be
> regarded through the lense of my current positions. To be fair, I do see
> that I should not be both the one suggesting changes, and the one deciding
> on them. I understand now that I could not have suggested Wikidata as a
> member of the Board. It takes an independent Board to evaluate such
> proposal and its virtues and decide on them.
> I want to send a few thank yous, in particular to the teams at the
> Wikimedia Foundation and at Google who helped me steer clear of actual
> conflicts of interests. They were wonderful, and extremely helpful. It
> bears a certain irony that both organizations had strong measures against
> exactly the kind of things that I have been regularly accused of.
> I only see three ways to stay clear from a perceived or potential Conflict
> of Interest: to lay still and do nothing, to remove the source of the
> Conflict, or to step away from the position of power. Since the first
> option is unsatisfying, the second option unavailable, only the third
> option remains.
> So I have decided to resign from the Board of Trustees.
> It was not an easy decision, and certainly not a step made any easier by
> the events in the last few months. I understand that I will disappoint many
> of the people who voted for me, and I want to apologize: I am sorry,
> honestly sorry, but I don’t see that it is me the Board needs now, or that
> the movement needs me in that position. What I learned is that the profile
> that allows someone to win an election is not the profile that makes an
> effective Trustee.
> But be warned that you will continue to hear from me, after a wikibreak.
> Expect crazy ideas, project proposals, and requests to fund and implement
> them. I will return to a more active role within the movement. I will be,
> again, free to work on things that are worth doing and that only I can do.
> I think that in that role I can be more effective and more valuable to the
> movement, the Foundation, and for our mission.
> Be bold,
> Denny
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> New messages to:
> Unsubscribe:,
> <>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
New messages to:

Reply via email to