On 05.09.2016 23:41, Asaf Bartov wrote:
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.
Asaf, I believe in the announcements prior record of affiliation with
WMF or one of the chapters was stated as an eligibility requirement. We
should not be then surprised that only people with prior record of
affiliation with WMF or one of the chapters were selected.
It is up to a debate whether this is the best strategy, but in the
situation when out of the three community elected Board members only one
is currently on the Board it could have been expected that the issue is
sensitive.
Cheers
Yaroslav
_______________________________________________
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>
