Hello. With my list-moderator hat, I am relaying two messages from Jimmy Wales, sent from an address he apparently hadn't used before, that were unintentionally caught by the mailing list filters and could not be let through. I paste them below.
Asaf ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jimmy Wales <jimmywa...@fandom.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org Cc: Bcc: Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 05:12:55 +0100 Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubric On 10/7/20 6:32 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: The replacement of an explicit voting process with an unspecified process + schedule seems unnecessarily vague. I agree that the vagueness is not good. To make sure everyone is aware: there has been no discussion and I'm unaware of anyone on the board who would be in favor of *removing* elections. I think the current wording here is awkward and may have been designed to not be super prescriptive about how exactly we might move to a process with a community-driven and community-approved "rubric" combined with elections. To remedy this defect seems quite easy - a future revision should explicitly include as much detail as is possible, and certainly should mandate elections. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jimmy Wales <jimmywa...@fandom.com> To: email@example.com Cc: Bcc: Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 05:13:08 +0100 Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubric On 10/7/20 10:03 PM, Yair Rand wrote: (Another minor point: The change from the description of the appointed seats from "non-community-selected, non-chapter-selected" to "non-community-sourced" seems to imply that the Board is prohibited from filling these seats with any community members. Previously, there have been community members in these seats.) I think this is a very good "catch". I'm sure that wasn't the intention of the rewording. I didn't write it and of course I can't speak for anyone else. I can say that there has been no discussion at the board level of anyone suggesting that we should not be able to select community members for these seats. Indeed, my personal view is that as we pursue board expansion, it is crucial that we try as hard as we can find to fill the appointed seats with as many deeply experienced community members (who have other relevant skills) as we possibly can. In terms of this proposal, I think that a minor change to clarify this minor point is a great idea! I think the ambiguity probably arose with the change from "selected" to "sourced" - a change that, itself, deserves great scrutiny. =============== (end of Jimmy's two messages. Future posts from Jimmy's new address should go through.) Asaf _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l 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>