How is that a conflict of interest? On Feb 20, 2013 1:44 PM, "John Vandenberg" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:17 PM, Thomas Dalton <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On 20 February 2013 11:17, Andrew Turvey <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I presume this decision was taken at the last board meeting on 9-10 > >> February. It's very disappointing that the draft minutes of the last > board > >> meeting still haven't been published, a week and a half after the > meeting. I > >> asked when this would be published over a week ago and was told that a > >> reasonably final draft was available on Sunday. Chapter policy says that > >> "Volunteers are encouraged to ... hold the Trustees and staff to > account, > >> through public and private discussion". [2] It's impossible to do this > if > >> we're not even allowed to see on a timely basis the decisions that are > being > >> made by the board. > > > > Publishing draft minutes is quite unusual for a board - most I'm aware > > of don't publish minutes until they are formally approved at the next > > meeting (which can be months later) - so I'm not sure a week and a > > half really qualifies as untimely. I doubt the minutes say much, any > > way. The discussion was presumably in camera, so there will just be > > the final decision in the public minutes and we've already been told > > about that. > > The minutes will, or should, note if there were any conflicts of > interest. e.g. *if* Greyham applied due to the direct personal > approaches, that should be noted. > > -- > John Vandenberg > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org >
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list [email protected] http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
