The ostensible rationale for this change, according to the Board chair was "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."
The new donor privacy policy has been explicitly enacted by the ED under this dispensation. The new policy is twice the length of the old one. That's a lot of commas. On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:23 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Christophe, > > Now that the end-of-Western-year holidays are behind us, I'm bumping this > thread in the hope that you'll respond to the points that I made in my > email from December 23rd. > > Thanks, > > Pine > > > On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi Christophe, > > > > Thank you for responding to my questions. > > > > > >> 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. > >> > > > > Perhaps you could explain further how a resolution which says: > > > > *"*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." > > > > amounts to removing micro-management. To me this looks like a sweeping > > delegation of authority. Under this resolution, policy changes that the > ED > > and/or his or her delegates make are not subject to advance review by the > > Board, the Legal Department, the community, or anyone else. This seems > > highly inadvisable, and I feel that this opens up WMF to legal and > > reputational risks that are of far greater concern than the value of > > sparing > > a few minutes of the Boards' time at meetings to review supposedly > > minor changes to policies. > > > > I would expect the Executive Director to have the authority to execute > > plans > > and manage his/her staff as permitted by the policies and resolutions > > adopted > > by the Board and as allowed by law, and to create and modify managerial > > policies for staff (for example, salary schedules and hiring procedures) > > that are compatible with the Board's policies and resolutions and with > the > > law. > > I wouldn't expect the Executive Director to have the authority to > > unilaterally > > change policies that were adopted by the Board, nor to have the authority > > to > > further delegate the authority to change policies that were adopted by > the > > 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 > >> > > > > Thanks for your efforts to communicate and cooperate. You and Natalia > have > > been helpful in improving communications between the community and the > > Board in 2016. (I agree with Rob that Dariusz was admirably responsive > and > > civil in public in 2015 in difficult circumstances, while others > weren't.) > > > > I would like to see further developments in this area, such as > developments > > that prevent the community from being surprised by Board resolutions such > > as the one that we are discussing here. > > > > Also, I would like to see consideration of changing WMF to a membership > > organization as a part of the upcoming strategy process. > > > > > >> > >> 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 :) > >> > > > > Thanks, this looks like a promising start. > > > > Doing the governance review in parallel with the strategy process, while > > continuing with regular annual work such as the Annual Plan process, > > might be a heavy lift for the Board and Katherine, so I encourage careful > > thinking about the timing of this review. My hunch is that it would be > > good > > to start and complete this review within 6 months, with the hope that the > > results could then be fed into the strategy process which will be > > continuing > > for awhile after that. Perhaps you, Katherine, Natalia or others may be > > able > > to shed some light on the capacity issue here, as well as the thoughts > > about the scope, timing, and cost of the governance review. > > > > In the governance review, I would like to see a particular focus on (1) > > a thorough review of the facts of Board members' actions in 2015, (2) > > an analysis of what can be learned from the facts of 2015, and (3) > > how WMF governance might become more aligned with and > > responsive to the community, such as by changing WMF to a > > membership organization. > > > > > >> I hope I answered your questions. > >> > >> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_ > >> Board_Governance_Committee > >> > >> > >> > > Thank you for your interest in trying to align WMF with the community. > > I appreciate the improvements in Board communications in 2016, and I look > > forward to further developments in communications and governance. I > > also look forward to hearing your responses to the community's comments > > that have been made in this thread. > > > > I realize that you may be offline this weekend, and I would prefer a > > thoughtful > > response to an immediate one, so I hope to hear back from you sometime > > within the next several days, perhaps after you have had an opportunity > to > > consult with others as you consider how to respond. > > > > Have a nice weekend, and Merry Christmas, > > > > Pine > > > _______________________________________________ > 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>
