Hi Dariusz, Your email fits perfectly with my description of the WMF board: "have not apologized or even changed a single part of their governance processes, despite vague unmeasurable offers to look into it." After many months there is no *commitment* to a date for any change to governance, nor is there any specific or measurable commitment to what the goal is for an "open conversation" or how that works. Knowing the history of the WMF board, there will no doubt be a pre-prepared policy or process and it will be implemented with barely any regard for community views which will be "canvassed" after the fact as a sop to "consensus".
No, I have not forgotten that Arnnon had to resign, thanks for pointing that out, and I recall how the WMF board unanimously supported him staying just the day before, even though it was absolutely obvious that he was not fit to be a trustee, and had he stayed the WMF board would have been a ghastly joke in terms of ethics for HR, at a time when the WMF's inability to do a professional job of HR in terms of the most basic staff morale was becoming a public fact. Am I right that you were the chair of the governance committee responsible for recommending Arnnon to the board and that you are still in that position? Why are you still involved in the governance process if you were responsible for this huge mistake and the resulting PR disaster for the WMF and Arnnon? Thanks, Fae On 2 May 2016 at 14:21, Dariusz Jemielniak <dar...@alk.edu.pl> wrote: > 02.05.2016 5:22 AM "Fæ" <fae...@gmail.com> napisał(a): >> >> Perhaps we could stick to facts? >> >> In the very recent case of Arnnon Geshuri, the WMF board of trustees >> proved themselves to be completely out of touch with the >> community. 314 Wikimedians took part in the vote of no >> confidence, hardly just "malcontents", and 95% of those that took part >> voted directly against the stated position of the board, who still >> remain happy with their decision to keep Geshuri as trustee, > > You must have missed the announcement that he stepped down from the Board. > > and have >> not apologized or even changed a single part of their governance >> processes, despite vague unmeasurable offers to look into it. >> > > I posted three items that we're changing in the future recruitment process > quite quickly. Currently we have an ongoing discussion on how to reform the > Board composition, and I hope we will be able to have an open conversation > about these ideas soon (read: before Wikimania). > > I'm sure that some people would like the WMF to be more like a Telekom. I > don't think that corporate standards and procedures are the answer, and I > really would like the WMF to be what it was meant to be: a mission-driven, > knowledge organization in NGO/open-source environment, run by passionate > employees in a strong, community- and staff- friendly culture, that > delivers visionary results. > > We're far from there yet, but following Telekom standards is not the > answer. The WMF should improve by all means, and it also should be more > accountable - but this is why this year it returns to the FDC process > (which has been one of my priorities to increase communal control), and > that should provide sensible community's feedback. > > Dj > _______________________________________________ > 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> -- fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae _______________________________________________ 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>