You clearly have a strong and abiding interest in movement governance, and have been asking some good questions. You should have submitted your candidacy.[1]
To your point, I guess it can be taken as a reminder, but it does not seem to me that the appointments were made *so as to minimize* influence by less well-known figures. Rather, it seems to me there was a strong emphasis on suitability for the work expected from them (as distinct from other considerations, such as "representation"); it is, of course, easier to assess that suitability in people known to the people making the decision, so old hands do have some advantage, but it isn't *because* they've been around or because they are trusted not to disrupt or challenge the system. A. [1] Perhaps you have, of course. I can't tell, since your account is anonymous, but if you did, it would have been good to disclose that fact as you were criticizing the process, and I trust you'd have realized that, so I'll assume you did not. On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 12:02 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <domedonf...@gmail.com> wrote: > We have seen various appointments to influential committees within the WMF > "system" in recent weeks: the Funds Dissemination Committee and the Board > Governance Committee Volunteer and Advisory members; the Board Election > Committee is being geared up and new Board members will soon be selected by > the Board itself and via community nomination. While I am sure that those > people who have volunteered their time to serve in those capacities are > well-meaning, conscientious and effective, and well-versed in how things > have been done in the past, it seems to me that the selections have leaned > too heavily on people already connected with the movement and its existing > structures and processes. I suggest that in line with the Strategy/2016-17 > process [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/2016-2017] being > planned, > these committees, and especially the Board itself, needs an element not > predisposed to the mere continuation of the current ways of doing things. > In short the WMF needs to raise its game and to do that it needs > constructive criticism from outside the existing cadres; it may be that the > movement as a whole needs to see disruptive change of a sort unlikely to > commend itself to a WMF/Silicon Valley view of the world. I urge those > responsbile for selection of these important and influential groups to > challenge themselves to look more widely and occasionally choose the > uncomfortable option. > > "Rogol Domedonfors" > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> -- Asaf Bartov Wikimedia Foundation <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! https://donate.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
