IMO we would do well with more democratic processes when it comes to the
board. Not having or not following democratic processes has led to a great
deal of distraction among the community these last 6 months as we have
struggled to deal with what has occurred. A by-election would hopefully get
the board on more solid footing as it would give the board greater
legitimacy. A majority of the board should be accountable to the community.


On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Anders Wennersten <> wrote:

> My spontaneous reaction, like others in the Election Committee, when
> informed of Dennys resignation was to think a byelection, soon in time,
> would be the "natural" way to fill the empty seat.  This is how it has been
> done earlier (even if now some years back)  and while the appointment of
> Maria after James had support of existing (informal?)  thinking ("if the
> Board reject any of the elected three, as they are entitled to do, they
> should appoint at No 4") , no such thinking has existed to support appoint
> no 5 in case of a resignation.
> But the more I think the more hesitant I become, and also taking into
> account the (excellent) feedback in the thread "what can we learn" that at
> least to me give a feeling the election process for community election can
> be adjusted (without need making it more complicated) so that a situation
> like this in the future would be resolved without any need of byelection.
> A Bylection
> *Draws a lot a resources from WMF
> *Draws a lot of resources from the Election Committee. While almost all in
> out internal discussion is willing to support a byelection (even among the
> ones not interested to stay on in a standing EC) , we are fewer then for
> last election. Greg has resigned as some others.
> *Draws a lot on energy from the community. Think of all banners that was
> put up and even at some time dedicated e-mails being sent out, just the
> translation was a huge effort as such
> I also want to highlight that that I can see risks in running a byelection
> *what if we are not able to live up to the demands of process quality and
> the elections legitimacy will become disputed?
> *what if we wear out the community motivation to participate in community
> election, could it make next ordinary election in less the a year less
> successful?
> *what if the process as such reopens earlier traumas in the movement (like
> James re the Board issue)?
> So while not "ruling out" a byelection, I believe we should not go for
> that option without thoroughly considering other option for filling the
> seat. There can be other alternative then look for no 5 in last election
> and we should remember it is only to fill a seat for less then a year, is a
> bylection an overkill for what it can resolve?
> Anders
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> New messages to:
> Unsubscribe:,
> <>

James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
New messages to:

Reply via email to