Hi Christophe,

I'm afraid that does not answer my question. If it changes absolutely
nothing, it would be an unnecessary resolution. So surely there is
*something* that changes (and that doesn't have to be a bad thing), such as
improved clarity or legal certainty. But probably you're right - and this
is more symbolic than anything else. And in that sense your response also
feels more symbolic than anything else.

If your statement 'I fail to see what community input could have brought'
truly reflects your opinion, that is quite saddening, and what I feared but
did not want to assume. It would be honest though, because it implies that
you wouldn't have changed your mind no matter what unimagined facts and
arguments the community may have come up with.

The argument that the decision makers cannot imagine what the stakeholders
could bring to the discussion reflects an attitude that you have all the
facts - a denial that there may be things that you don't know to not know.

I hope this is an unfortunate glitch (which can happen).

Best,
Lodewijk

2016-12-22 8:13 GMT+01:00 Christophe Henner <chen...@wikimedia.org>:

> Hey,
>
> I feel there might be a misunderstanding here :)
>
> Legal team has, for a long time now, always worked with the community on
> policy updates.
>
> I don't see that changing.
>
> This is a technical / legal delegation. I fail to see what community input
> could have brought. We needed to be able to make changes to policies more
> easily, it is now possible.
>
> Does this mean it changes everything else, no.
>
> Le 21 déc. 2016 11:24 PM, "Lodewijk" <lodew...@effeietsanders.org> a
> écrit :
>
> Hi Christophe, all,
>
> I wonder, was there an urgency to pass this resolution, or did I miss the
> invitation for community members to give input on this proposal? It doesn't
> look particularly sensitive so that it couldn't be shared in advance. It
> has potentially direct impact on the functioning of the community. Seems
> like a typical example where requesting input could be valuable. So I'd
> like to understand the thinking behind the chosen process a little better.
>
> Basically I'd have liked the discussion in this thread to have been part of
> the considerations, rather than a response to the resolution.
>
> Thanks,
> Lodewijk
>
> 2016-12-21 4:45 GMT+01:00 Christophe Henner <chen...@wikimedia.org>:
>
> > Hi Pine,
> >
> > If you don't mind I will address your different points separately.
> >
> > First, the resolution and its context. "Supervising" the ED is indeed a
> > board duty, but this supervision must not become micro-management. That
> > resolution provides staff the liberty to do their work more efficiently.
> It
> > doesn't remove our duty of oversight.
> >
> > I feel like you think delegating negates ones ability to provide
> > supervision, I would tend to think otherwise as delegating free time and
> > energy to focus on the core roles of a board.
> >
> > Second, the requirements to answer the community. I'm sorry, here I
> > answered quite spontaneously, you are right nothing forces us to.
> >
> > But, as I've said in my candidacy and in public some time I believe we
> > have, as WMF board, a leadership duty. And I also believe you lead by
> > example. I've always believed, in the movement, we are all partners. We
> > need each other to push forward our mission. You treat partners the way
> > yourself want to be treated by them. That is why I believe it is
> important
> > to communicate. It doesn't mean we have to see eye to eye on everything
> but
> > that when a question rise we should answer as much as we can. That's
> > something I've said to nearly everyone who reached out to me in the past
> > few month privately, my answer perhaps won't be the one you want, but at
> > least there will be an answer and an explanation every time I can. Like
> > right now actually :D
> >
> > Finally, regarding board governance review, Natalia, as chair of the BGC,
> > published minutes of our meetings[1], and that is a key topic we address
> > and not push aside. That being said it will be a board review, not one on
> > that specific event. We will be able to provide more information on that
> > topic soon I think :)
> >
> > I hope I answered your questions.
> >
> > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> > Board_Governance_Committee
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Christophe HENNER
> > Chair of the board of trustees
> > chen...@wikimedia.org
> > +33650664739 <+33%206%2050%2066%2047%2039>
> >
> > twitter *@schiste*        skype *christophe_henner*
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 4:14 AM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Christophe,
> > >
> > > I wish it was true that the Board is required to answer the community's
> > > questions, but that isn't the case. WMF isn't a membership
> organization,
> > > there isn't a policy that requires the Board to be responsive to
> > community
> > > input and questions, and the community has limited ability to influence
> > the
> > > Board (though I think it is wise for the Board to listen).
> > >
> > > My perspective is that the 2015 board was not particularly responsive
> to
> > > community (or WMF employees') questions or input, including questions
> and
> > > input regarding human resources and governance matters. (For example, I
> > > still haven't seen a good explanation of why WMF shouldn't undergo a
> > > governance review in the wake of Doc James' dismissal; WMF has appeared
> > to
> > > try to brush that issue under the rug rather than address it with the
> > level
> > > of transparency and rigor that I feel it deserves.) Thankfully the
> level
> > of
> > > responsiveness has improved since 2015, but it's incorrect to say that
> > the
> > > Board is required to respond to community questions.
> > >
> > > The vague nature of the resolution as MZMcBride quotes it makes me
> > > uncomfortable. I would suggest revising the language of this resolution
> > so
> > > that it is clearer which kinds of changes the Board will require the
> > > Executive Director to submit to the WMF Board for approval. I realize
> > that
> > > it may seem expedient to grant the Executive Director wide latitude,
> but
> > I
> > > feel that the Board should provide more specificity, particularly given
> > > what happened when the Board was apparently so lax with the supervision
> > of
> > > the previous Executive Director.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Pine
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:48 AM, Christophe Henner <
> > chen...@wikimedia.org
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hey,
> > > >
> > > > Basically it's making the legal team life's easier when they need to
> do
> > > > small and/or quick changes. They don't have to go through the whole
> > > > resolution process to change a comma.
> > > >
> > > > We're still informed and are talking with staff about those changes.
> > > >
> > > > As for responsibility, we decided to delegate responsibility, but at
> > the
> > > > end of the day we still will have to answer the community's question
> :)
> > > >
> > > > Have a good day
> > > >
> > > > Christophe
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Le 20 déc. 2016 6:50 AM, "MZMcBride" <z...@mzmcbride.com> a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > This is probably of interest to this list.
> > > >
> > > > https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Delegation_of_policy-ma
> > > king_authority
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > Delegation of policy-making authority
> > > >
> > > > This was approved on December 13, 2016 by the Board of Trustees.
> > > >
> > > > Whereas, the Board of Trustees has traditionally approved certain
> > global
> > > > Wikimedia Foundation policies (such as the Privacy Policy and Terms
> of
> > > > Use) as requested during the July 4, 2004 Board meeting
> > > > <https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Meetings/July_4,_2004>;
> > > >
> > > > Whereas, the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director has authority to
> > > > conduct the affairs of the Wikimedia Foundation, which includes
> > adopting
> > > > and implementing policies;
> > > >
> > > > Resolved, the Board hereby delegates the authority to adopt, alter,
> and
> > > > revoke policies to the Executive Director, who may further delegate
> > such
> > > > authority to Wikimedia Foundation staff as they deem appropriate;
> > > >
> > > > Resolved, the Board may continue to review and approve policies for
> the
> > > > Wikimedia Foundation upon request to the Executive Director or as
> > > required
> > > > by law.
> > > >
> > > > Approve
> > > >
> > > >    Christophe Henner (Chair), Maria Sefidari (Vice Chair), Dariusz
> > > >    Jemielniak, Kelly Battles, Guy Kawasaki, Jimmy Wales, Nataliia
> > Tymkiv,
> > > >    and Alice Wiegand
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > I wonder how much of this resolution is formalizing what was already
> > > > happening and how much of this is moving the Wikimedia Foundation in
> a
> > > new
> > > > direction. After a very tumultuous year at the Wikimedia Foundation,
> > this
> > > > is certainly a notable development.
> > > >
> > > > I also wonder in what ways this abrupt change will alter the
> > relationship
> > > > between the editing communities and the Board of Trustees. The
> > Wikimedia
> > > > Foundation Board of Trustees seems to be committing itself to
> > downsizing
> > > > its role and responsibilities. The concern is that a change like this
> > > will
> > > > reduce accountability when policies are set, unset, and changed by
> > > someone
> > > > overseeing a large staff that regularly comes in conflict with an
> even
> > > > larger set of editing communities. The Executive Director, of course,
> > is
> > > > unelected and has been a central point of repeated controversies
> > > recently.
> > > > It's been less than a year since the previous Executive Director
> > resigned
> > > > after being forced out by her staff. In the context of the recent
> > > history,
> > > > this resolution is all the more puzzling.
> > > >
> > > > MZMcBride
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/%0Awiki/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>
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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>
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> > > i/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>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> > i/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>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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>
> _______________________________________________
> 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>
>
_______________________________________________
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>

Reply via email to