Mailing List Archive

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  View All
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
Matt, here
<https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=697407200&oldid=697407110>,
Jimmy says this was a removal for cause.

Anthony Cole <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anthonyhcole>


On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Matthew Flaschen <
matthew.flaschen@gatech.edu> wrote:

> On 12/29/2015 07:19 AM, Gnangarra wrote:
>
>> there are bigger questions than why like;
>>
>> - how can this take place
>> - how can the community ensure its representatives independence in the
>> future,
>> - what effect will this have on other elected representatives on the
>> board
>>
>> The Florida statute(
>> https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/617.0808 ) referred
>> to earlier says that If a director is elected by a class, chapter, or
>> other
>> organizational unit, or by region or other geographic grouping, the
>> director may be removed only by the members of that class, chapter, unit,
>> or grouping.
>>
>
> IANAL, but I believe that clause does not apply. There are no "members of
> that class, chapter, unit, or grouping." because there are no members at
> all (https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Bylaws#ARTICLE_III_-_MEMBERSHIP).
> It is also under "2. A majority of all votes of the members, if the
> director was elected or appointed by the members." which also does not
> apply for the same reason.
>
> To be clear, I believe the board's action was legal, but I believe that
> ethically they should state whether it was for cause, and if at all
> possible why he was removed.
>
> Matt Flaschen
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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-request@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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
Thank you to everyone who responded to my email about the Board’s recent
decision. We recognize this is the Board's first removal of a sitting
Trustee, and that has led to questions and perhaps some confusion.

I wanted to provide you with some additional information in response to the
discussions on this thread. As many of you know, we did not intend for the
decision to become public the way it did. We planned to have a discussion
and decision in the meeting, but could not be certain of the outcome ahead
of the final vote. Since the meeting, we have taken our time to work
together to make sure the information we share will be accurate,
respectful, and informative to the greatest extent possible. At the same
time, there is a limit to what the Board can share. We have fiduciary
duties, which include Board confidentiality, and we must respect them in
this decision as we would in others.

I want to be very clear that the Board decision was not about a difference
of opinion on a matter of WMF direction or strategy between James and the
other Trustees. Over the course of the past few months, the Trustees had
multiple conversations around expectations for Trustee conduct,
responsibilities, and confidentiality. Ultimately, the majority of the
Trustees came to the opinion that we were not able to reach a common
understanding with James on fulfilling those expectations. We have a duty
as a Board to ensure we all abide by our roles and responsibilities as an
essential condition for effective governance. I also want to reaffirm that
this decision was made internally, by the Board, without any outside
influence, and according to the process outlined in our Bylaws.

Under the Wikimedia Foundation’s Bylaws, and, in accordance with Florida
law (where, as a 501(c)(3) charity, the Foundation is registered), members
of the Board who are selected through community or affiliate elections are
then appointed to the Board by the existing members. Since all members of
the Board are appointed by the Board itself, the Board retains the ability
to manage its composition as necessary to maintain the working environment
required to be effective.

As someone who was appointed through a community process, I understand how
important it is to have strong voices from the community on our Board. I
want to be absolutely clear that this decision does not change our
commitment to engaging with a diverse, talented, opinionated, and
representative group of leaders to serve on our Board. It also does not
change our commitment to encouraging and hearing different voices on
direction and strategy.

We are working with the 2015 Elections Committee to fill this vacancy with
a member of the Wikimedia community. This is a top priority. More
information will be available once the Board has had a chance to confer
with the 2015 Elections Committee.

From our viewpoint, our actions around the removal are concluded. We
sincerely hope that James will continue to be an active, constructive part
of the Wikimedia movement. I personally look forward to continuing
collaboration with him.

Thank you,

Patricio
--
_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
Dear Patricio,

Thank you for your response. However, I don't quite read an explanation in
this email. You elaborate a little bit on process (nothing new or
surprising there), and the only reason I can extract from your email is
this:

"Ultimately, the majority of the Trustees came to the opinion that we were
not able to reach a common understanding with James on fulfilling [Trustee
conduct, responsibilities, and confidentiality]"

Are we to expect an actual explanation still with the actual reasons why
this decision was taken? Because this goes little further than the staff
members that 'leave for personal reasons'. When a significant and serious
step like this is taken, to remove a community selected board member, I do
expect a better explanation from the board towards the electorate than
this.

I am looking forward to more - from you, from James or anyone else.

Best,
Lodewijk

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Patricio Lorente <
patricio.lorente@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thank you to everyone who responded to my email about the Board’s recent
> decision. We recognize this is the Board's first removal of a sitting
> Trustee, and that has led to questions and perhaps some confusion.
>
> I wanted to provide you with some additional information in response to the
> discussions on this thread. As many of you know, we did not intend for the
> decision to become public the way it did. We planned to have a discussion
> and decision in the meeting, but could not be certain of the outcome ahead
> of the final vote. Since the meeting, we have taken our time to work
> together to make sure the information we share will be accurate,
> respectful, and informative to the greatest extent possible. At the same
> time, there is a limit to what the Board can share. We have fiduciary
> duties, which include Board confidentiality, and we must respect them in
> this decision as we would in others.
>
> I want to be very clear that the Board decision was not about a difference
> of opinion on a matter of WMF direction or strategy between James and the
> other Trustees. Over the course of the past few months, the Trustees had
> multiple conversations around expectations for Trustee conduct,
> responsibilities, and confidentiality. Ultimately, the majority of the
> Trustees came to the opinion that we were not able to reach a common
> understanding with James on fulfilling those expectations. We have a duty
> as a Board to ensure we all abide by our roles and responsibilities as an
> essential condition for effective governance. I also want to reaffirm that
> this decision was made internally, by the Board, without any outside
> influence, and according to the process outlined in our Bylaws.
>
> Under the Wikimedia Foundation’s Bylaws, and, in accordance with Florida
> law (where, as a 501(c)(3) charity, the Foundation is registered), members
> of the Board who are selected through community or affiliate elections are
> then appointed to the Board by the existing members. Since all members of
> the Board are appointed by the Board itself, the Board retains the ability
> to manage its composition as necessary to maintain the working environment
> required to be effective.
>
> As someone who was appointed through a community process, I understand how
> important it is to have strong voices from the community on our Board. I
> want to be absolutely clear that this decision does not change our
> commitment to engaging with a diverse, talented, opinionated, and
> representative group of leaders to serve on our Board. It also does not
> change our commitment to encouraging and hearing different voices on
> direction and strategy.
>
> We are working with the 2015 Elections Committee to fill this vacancy with
> a member of the Wikimedia community. This is a top priority. More
> information will be available once the Board has had a chance to confer
> with the 2015 Elections Committee.
>
> From our viewpoint, our actions around the removal are concluded. We
> sincerely hope that James will continue to be an active, constructive part
> of the Wikimedia movement. I personally look forward to continuing
> collaboration with him.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Patricio
> --
> _______________________________________________
> 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-request@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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
Patricio,

Thanks. Could you explain to us the scope of "board confidentiality", and
how and where it is defined for both current and former members?

Best,
Andreas

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Lodewijk <lodewijk@effeietsanders.org>
wrote:

> Dear Patricio,
>
> Thank you for your response. However, I don't quite read an explanation in
> this email. You elaborate a little bit on process (nothing new or
> surprising there), and the only reason I can extract from your email is
> this:
>
> "Ultimately, the majority of the Trustees came to the opinion that we were
> not able to reach a common understanding with James on fulfilling [Trustee
> conduct, responsibilities, and confidentiality]"
>
> Are we to expect an actual explanation still with the actual reasons why
> this decision was taken? Because this goes little further than the staff
> members that 'leave for personal reasons'. When a significant and serious
> step like this is taken, to remove a community selected board member, I do
> expect a better explanation from the board towards the electorate than
> this.
>
> I am looking forward to more - from you, from James or anyone else.
>
> Best,
> Lodewijk
>
> On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Patricio Lorente <
> patricio.lorente@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thank you to everyone who responded to my email about the Board’s recent
> > decision. We recognize this is the Board's first removal of a sitting
> > Trustee, and that has led to questions and perhaps some confusion.
> >
> > I wanted to provide you with some additional information in response to
> the
> > discussions on this thread. As many of you know, we did not intend for
> the
> > decision to become public the way it did. We planned to have a discussion
> > and decision in the meeting, but could not be certain of the outcome
> ahead
> > of the final vote. Since the meeting, we have taken our time to work
> > together to make sure the information we share will be accurate,
> > respectful, and informative to the greatest extent possible. At the same
> > time, there is a limit to what the Board can share. We have fiduciary
> > duties, which include Board confidentiality, and we must respect them in
> > this decision as we would in others.
> >
> > I want to be very clear that the Board decision was not about a
> difference
> > of opinion on a matter of WMF direction or strategy between James and the
> > other Trustees. Over the course of the past few months, the Trustees had
> > multiple conversations around expectations for Trustee conduct,
> > responsibilities, and confidentiality. Ultimately, the majority of the
> > Trustees came to the opinion that we were not able to reach a common
> > understanding with James on fulfilling those expectations. We have a duty
> > as a Board to ensure we all abide by our roles and responsibilities as an
> > essential condition for effective governance. I also want to reaffirm
> that
> > this decision was made internally, by the Board, without any outside
> > influence, and according to the process outlined in our Bylaws.
> >
> > Under the Wikimedia Foundation’s Bylaws, and, in accordance with Florida
> > law (where, as a 501(c)(3) charity, the Foundation is registered),
> members
> > of the Board who are selected through community or affiliate elections
> are
> > then appointed to the Board by the existing members. Since all members of
> > the Board are appointed by the Board itself, the Board retains the
> ability
> > to manage its composition as necessary to maintain the working
> environment
> > required to be effective.
> >
> > As someone who was appointed through a community process, I understand
> how
> > important it is to have strong voices from the community on our Board. I
> > want to be absolutely clear that this decision does not change our
> > commitment to engaging with a diverse, talented, opinionated, and
> > representative group of leaders to serve on our Board. It also does not
> > change our commitment to encouraging and hearing different voices on
> > direction and strategy.
> >
> > We are working with the 2015 Elections Committee to fill this vacancy
> with
> > a member of the Wikimedia community. This is a top priority. More
> > information will be available once the Board has had a chance to confer
> > with the 2015 Elections Committee.
> >
> > From our viewpoint, our actions around the removal are concluded. We
> > sincerely hope that James will continue to be an active, constructive
> part
> > of the Wikimedia movement. I personally look forward to continuing
> > collaboration with him.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Patricio
> > --
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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-request@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-request@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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
Hi Patricio,
a little question to understand.

Does it means that the majority of the board can dismiss the minority
for some reasons?

I understand the effectiveness, but this sentence is a little bit critical.

Kind regards

On 31.12.2015 14:02, Patricio Lorente wrote:
>
> Under the Wikimedia Foundation’s Bylaws, and, in accordance with Florida
> law (where, as a 501(c)(3) charity, the Foundation is registered), members
> of the Board who are selected through community or affiliate elections are
> then appointed to the Board by the existing members. Since all members of
> the Board are appointed by the Board itself, the Board retains the ability
> to manage its composition as necessary to maintain the working environment
> required to be effective.
>
>

--
Ilario Valdelli
Wikimedia CH
Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
Tel: +41764821371
http://www.wikimedia.ch


_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Anthony Cole <ahcoleecu@gmail.com> wrote:
> Matt, here
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=697407200&oldid=697407110>,
> Jimmy says this was a removal for cause.
>
> Anthony Cole <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anthonyhcole>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Matthew Flaschen <
> matthew.flaschen@gatech.edu> wrote:
>
>> On 12/29/2015 07:19 AM, Gnangarra wrote:
>>
>>> there are bigger questions than why like;
>>>
>>> - how can this take place
>>> - how can the community ensure its representatives independence in the
>>> future,
>>> - what effect will this have on other elected representatives on the
>>> board
>>>
>>> The Florida statute(
>>> https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/617.0808 ) referred
>>> to earlier says that If a director is elected by a class, chapter, or
>>> other
>>> organizational unit, or by region or other geographic grouping, the
>>> director may be removed only by the members of that class, chapter, unit,
>>> or grouping.
>>>
>>
>> IANAL, but I believe that clause does not apply. There are no "members of
>> that class, chapter, unit, or grouping." because there are no members at
>> all (https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Bylaws#ARTICLE_III_-_MEMBERSHIP).
>> It is also under "2. A majority of all votes of the members, if the
>> director was elected or appointed by the members." which also does not
>> apply for the same reason.
>>
>> To be clear, I believe the board's action was legal, but I believe that
>> ethically they should state whether it was for cause, and if at all
>> possible why he was removed.

do the clauses from 617.0808 apply at all - as the bylaws explicitly
specify removal? "Trustees .. are understood to act as fiduciaries
with regard to the Foundation". "The Board will approve candidates who
receive the most votes". " Trustee may be removed, with or without
cause, by a majority vote of the Trustees". the election page states
it like this: "Members of the Wikimedia community have the opportunity
to elect three candidates to a two-year term which will expire in
2017." the community is a class in the sense of 617.0808, and would
apply if the bylaws do not specify removal, isn't it?

jimmy wales btw wrote on his talk page "... this was a removal for
cause" and "I do not support any changes to the bylaws around the
composition of the board at this time. There is a very unhealthy and
plainly false view among some in the community that elected board
members are more supportive of the community than appointed. It
actually doesn't turn out that way in practice, and with good reason.
All board members have a fiduciary duty to the organization, which
means that caring about the community - the lifeblood of the
organization - comes naturally to everyone." :
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AJimbo_Wales&type=revision&diff=697407275&oldid=697403591

the whole story reminds me on what josh wrote in the ny times months ago:
The election — a record 5,000 voters turned out, nearly three times
the number from the previous election — was a rebuke to the status
quo; all three incumbents up for re-election were defeated, replaced
by critics of the superprotect measures. Two other members will leave
the 10-member board at the end of this year.
http://nytimes.com/2015/06/21/opinion/can-wikipedia-survive.html

rupert

_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
On 31 December 2015 at 13:31, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466@gmail.com> wrote:
> Patricio,
> Thanks. Could you explain to us the scope of "board confidentiality", and
> how and where it is defined for both current and former members?
> Best,
> Andreas

Anyone who has had trustee training can answer this. No trustee of any
charity/NGO is under a legally binding confidentiality agreement, for
good ethical reasons. Trustees *must* be free to blow the whistle for
the long term good of the organization without fear of petty civil
proceedings to shut them up. Trustees can *choose* to resolve any
issues whether personal or organizational behind closed doors, but
they are always free to act in a way that follows their ethics, even
though in practice this often means they will resign from the board at
the same time.

Jimmy Wales has seen fit to express his personal views about James in
public in a transparent and honest way; and James and the remaining
trustees are free to do exactly the same thing. There's no "Jimmy
clause" that our movement agreed to.

If James can be bothered to run again for election back on the WMF
board of trustees, he'll be getting my vote. As far as I can make out,
being kicked off the board for woolly, secretive or short-term
political reasons this time around is no bar to re-running.

Fae
--
faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
Can the board please very clearly state whether this removal was for cause,
or not!?
On 1 Jan 2016 12:03 am, "Patricio Lorente" <patricio.lorente@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thank you to everyone who responded to my email about the Board’s recent
> decision. We recognize this is the Board's first removal of a sitting
> Trustee, and that has led to questions and perhaps some confusion.
>
> I wanted to provide you with some additional information in response to the
> discussions on this thread. As many of you know, we did not intend for the
> decision to become public the way it did. We planned to have a discussion
> and decision in the meeting, but could not be certain of the outcome ahead
> of the final vote. Since the meeting, we have taken our time to work
> together to make sure the information we share will be accurate,
> respectful, and informative to the greatest extent possible. At the same
> time, there is a limit to what the Board can share. We have fiduciary
> duties, which include Board confidentiality, and we must respect them in
> this decision as we would in others.
>
> I want to be very clear that the Board decision was not about a difference
> of opinion on a matter of WMF direction or strategy between James and the
> other Trustees. Over the course of the past few months, the Trustees had
> multiple conversations around expectations for Trustee conduct,
> responsibilities, and confidentiality. Ultimately, the majority of the
> Trustees came to the opinion that we were not able to reach a common
> understanding with James on fulfilling those expectations. We have a duty
> as a Board to ensure we all abide by our roles and responsibilities as an
> essential condition for effective governance. I also want to reaffirm that
> this decision was made internally, by the Board, without any outside
> influence, and according to the process outlined in our Bylaws.
>
> Under the Wikimedia Foundation’s Bylaws, and, in accordance with Florida
> law (where, as a 501(c)(3) charity, the Foundation is registered), members
> of the Board who are selected through community or affiliate elections are
> then appointed to the Board by the existing members. Since all members of
> the Board are appointed by the Board itself, the Board retains the ability
> to manage its composition as necessary to maintain the working environment
> required to be effective.
>
> As someone who was appointed through a community process, I understand how
> important it is to have strong voices from the community on our Board. I
> want to be absolutely clear that this decision does not change our
> commitment to engaging with a diverse, talented, opinionated, and
> representative group of leaders to serve on our Board. It also does not
> change our commitment to encouraging and hearing different voices on
> direction and strategy.
>
> We are working with the 2015 Elections Committee to fill this vacancy with
> a member of the Wikimedia community. This is a top priority. More
> information will be available once the Board has had a chance to confer
> with the 2015 Elections Committee.
>
> From our viewpoint, our actions around the removal are concluded. We
> sincerely hope that James will continue to be an active, constructive part
> of the Wikimedia movement. I personally look forward to continuing
> collaboration with him.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Patricio
> --
> _______________________________________________
> 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-request@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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
On 2015-12-31 14:44, Fæ wrote:
> On 31 December 2015 at 13:31, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466@gmail.com> wrote:

> If James can be bothered to run again for election back on the WMF
> board of trustees, he'll be getting my vote. As far as I can make out,
> being kicked off the board for woolly, secretive or short-term
> political reasons this time around is no bar to re-running.
>
> Fae

Indeed, this is a point I would like to understand: Imagine James would
run at the coming elections and wins - would he be again immediately
removed from the board? I did not vote for him last time, for a number
of reasons, but I would seriously consider voting for him this time if
he runs.

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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 9:02 AM, John Mark Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Can the board please very clearly state whether this removal was for cause,
> or not!?
>

If they'd like to. But if not, no. So people who keep demanding things,
after what I personally believe between Jimmy's comment and others, we can
put a lot (no, not all) of pieces to get ourselves.

We edit a website. This may surprise a lot of people, but that entitles
you to nothing outside of that domain. It doesn't get you a discount at
McDonalds, it doesn't get you out of traffic violations and probably won't
get you your next job. Yes - our position as volunteers is important (if
not critical) to the Foundation and its overall message. But the so called
"community" needs to realize their boundaries.

People who keep demanding such things (such as a detailed report of what
happened) are showing a lack of knowledge on the non-profit board structure
- and perhaps other things. Just my two cents, since everybody else is
piling on in opposition.

--

Ryan
User:Rjd0060
_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
You are quite correct, we cannot force the board to respond. However if they don't we are free to vote with our feet - or not. The fundamental rule of crowdsourcing is 'do not alienate your crowd'. They tread a delicate line, whatever they do is going to annoy somebody.
Cheers,
Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Rjd0060
Sent: Thursday, 31 December 2015 4:12 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 9:02 AM, John Mark Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Can the board please very clearly state whether this removal was for
> cause, or not!?
>

If they'd like to. But if not, no. So people who keep demanding things, after what I personally believe between Jimmy's comment and others, we can put a lot (no, not all) of pieces to get ourselves.

We edit a website. This may surprise a lot of people, but that entitles you to nothing outside of that domain. It doesn't get you a discount at McDonalds, it doesn't get you out of traffic violations and probably won't get you your next job. Yes - our position as volunteers is important (if not critical) to the Foundation and its overall message. But the so called "community" needs to realize their boundaries.

People who keep demanding such things (such as a detailed report of what
happened) are showing a lack of knowledge on the non-profit board structure
- and perhaps other things. Just my two cents, since everybody else is piling on in opposition.

--

Ryan
User:Rjd0060
_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11292 - Release Date: 12/31/15


_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Rjd0060
Sent: Thursday, 31 December 2015 4:12 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 9:02 AM, John Mark Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Can the board please very clearly state whether this removal was for
> cause, or not!?
>

If they'd like to. But if not, no. So people who keep demanding things, after what I personally believe between Jimmy's comment and others, we can put a lot (no, not all) of pieces to get ourselves.

We edit a website. This may surprise a lot of people, but that entitles you to nothing outside of that domain. It doesn't get you a discount at McDonalds, it doesn't get you out of traffic violations and probably won't get you your next job. Yes - our position as volunteers is important (if not critical) to the Foundation and its overall message. But the so called "community" needs to realize their boundaries.

People who keep demanding such things (such as a detailed report of what
happened) are showing a lack of knowledge on the non-profit board structure
- and perhaps other things. Just my two cents, since everybody else is piling on in opposition.

--

Ryan
User:Rjd0060
_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11292 - Release Date: 12/31/15


_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
I would vote for him if a satisfactory explanation is not forthcoming, just as a matter of principle.
Cheers,
Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Yaroslav M. Blanter
Sent: Thursday, 31 December 2015 4:07 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On 2015-12-31 14:44, Fæ wrote:
> On 31 December 2015 at 13:31, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466@gmail.com> wrote:

> If James can be bothered to run again for election back on the WMF
> board of trustees, he'll be getting my vote. As far as I can make out,
> being kicked off the board for woolly, secretive or short-term
> political reasons this time around is no bar to re-running.
>
> Fae

Indeed, this is a point I would like to understand: Imagine James would run at the coming elections and wins - would he be again immediately removed from the board? I did not vote for him last time, for a number of reasons, but I would seriously consider voting for him this time if he runs.

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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11292 - Release Date: 12/31/15


_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Peter Southwood <
peter.southwood@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> I would vote for him if a satisfactory explanation is not forthcoming,
> just as a matter of principle.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>


According to applicable Florida law,[1]

(f) Any director who is removed from the board is not eligible to stand for
reelection until the next annual meeting at which directors are elected.

[1] https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/617.0808





> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Yaroslav M. Blanter
> Sent: Thursday, 31 December 2015 4:07 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board
>
> On 2015-12-31 14:44, Fæ wrote:
> > On 31 December 2015 at 13:31, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > If James can be bothered to run again for election back on the WMF
> > board of trustees, he'll be getting my vote. As far as I can make out,
> > being kicked off the board for woolly, secretive or short-term
> > political reasons this time around is no bar to re-running.
> >
> > Fae
>
> Indeed, this is a point I would like to understand: Imagine James would
> run at the coming elections and wins - would he be again immediately
> removed from the board? I did not vote for him last time, for a number of
> reasons, but I would seriously consider voting for him this time if he runs.
>
> 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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11292 - Release Date: 12/31/15
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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-request@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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
But then again, these are not direct elections. The elections we have are just recommendations, and the board appoints community trustees based on those recommendations.

Techman224

> On Dec 31, 2015, at 11:52 AM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Peter Southwood <
> peter.southwood@telkomsa.net <mailto:peter.southwood@telkomsa.net>> wrote:
>
>> I would vote for him if a satisfactory explanation is not forthcoming,
>> just as a matter of principle.
>> Cheers,
>> Peter
>>
>
>
> According to applicable Florida law,[1]
>
> (f) Any director who is removed from the board is not eligible to stand for
> reelection until the next annual meeting at which directors are elected.
>
> [1] https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/617.0808 <https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/617.0808>
>
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On
>> Behalf Of Yaroslav M. Blanter
>> Sent: Thursday, 31 December 2015 4:07 PM
>> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board
>>
>> On 2015-12-31 14:44, Fæ wrote:
>>> On 31 December 2015 at 13:31, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> If James can be bothered to run again for election back on the WMF
>>> board of trustees, he'll be getting my vote. As far as I can make out,
>>> being kicked off the board for woolly, secretive or short-term
>>> political reasons this time around is no bar to re-running.
>>>
>>> Fae
>>
>> Indeed, this is a point I would like to understand: Imagine James would
>> run at the coming elections and wins - would he be again immediately
>> removed from the board? I did not vote for him last time, for a number of
>> reasons, but I would seriously consider voting for him this time if he runs.
>>
>> 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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11292 - Release Date: 12/31/15
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines>
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
"Peter Southwood" <peter.southwood@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> You are quite correct, we cannot force the board to
> respond. However if they don't we are free to vote with our
> feet - or not. The fundamental rule of crowdsourcing is 'do
> not alienate your crowd'. They tread a delicate line,
> whatever they do is going to annoy somebody.
> […]

By mid-December, they had crowdsourced USD 18.000.000 in
this campaign, so they seem to be on the right track. If
volunteer editors would leave in a significant number, the
effect would be the same that we have seen for MediaWiki
development: "We need to raise /more/ money to employ some-
one to edit and update articles. You want to keep Wikipedia
alive, don't you?"

All threats against the board or WMF in general are power-
less unless there is a viable alternative to Wikipedia for
volunteers that is /better/; at the moment there is not even
a clone that provides just the same data.

Tim


_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
Regarding: "at the moment there is not even a clone that provides just the
same data.": creating an alternative host for a fork of Wikipedia is
possible, although labor-intensive and a bit capital-intensive, and it's
far from ideal. I feel that at this time the information available about
the governance of WMF, while deeply concerning, is short of the threshold
at which I would feel comfortable pursuing this option.

A reminder that we'll have 2 new trustees starting in January, and there
will be an election in 2016 for the affiliate-appointed trustees' seats. As
Yoda wisely said, "Always in motion is the future."

I'm contemplating a response to Patricio's email. I'm currently in the
difficult position of figuring out who to trust. It may take another day or
so for me to sift through my thoughts.

Pine

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Tim Landscheidt <tim@tim-landscheidt.de>
wrote:

> "Peter Southwood" <peter.southwood@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> > You are quite correct, we cannot force the board to
> > respond. However if they don't we are free to vote with our
> > feet - or not. The fundamental rule of crowdsourcing is 'do
> > not alienate your crowd'. They tread a delicate line,
> > whatever they do is going to annoy somebody.
> > […]
>
> By mid-December, they had crowdsourced USD 18.000.000 in
> this campaign, so they seem to be on the right track. If
> volunteer editors would leave in a significant number, the
> effect would be the same that we have seen for MediaWiki
> development: "We need to raise /more/ money to employ some-
> one to edit and update articles. You want to keep Wikipedia
> alive, don't you?"
>
> All threats against the board or WMF in general are power-
> less unless there is a viable alternative to Wikipedia for
> volunteers that is /better/; at the moment there is not even
> a clone that provides just the same data.
>
> Tim
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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-request@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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
On 12/31/2015 04:07 AM, Anthony Cole wrote:
> Matt, here
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=697407200&oldid=697407110>,
> Jimmy says this was a removal for cause.

Thanks, I appreciate you forwarding this.

Matt Flaschen


_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
On 12/31/2015 08:02 AM, Patricio Lorente wrote:
> Thank you to everyone who responded to my email about the Board’s recent
> decision. We recognize this is the Board's first removal of a sitting
> Trustee, and that has led to questions and perhaps some confusion.
>
> I wanted to provide you with some additional information in response to the
> discussions on this thread.

Thank you for providing a clearer picture. I understand the board
members are bound in what exactly they can say.

I don't have enough information to agree or disagree with the decision
you made, but I have a better understanding of its basis.

Matt Flaschen


_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
Jimbo has stated on Jimbo-talk that this was a removal for cause:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=697407200

He also mentions on that page that he and others tried to talk Heilman into
resigning quietly, but he chose to make the BoT push him:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=697407110

Given this, it's entirely unsurprising that he didn't see a need to aid the
trustees by announcing his departure on a timetable convenient to them.
I'm actually a little shocked that Patricio and Jimbo didn't see that
coming and seem shocked that it happened.

Cheers,
Craig

On 1 January 2016 at 00:02, John Mark Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com> wrote:

> Can the board please very clearly state whether this removal was for cause,
> or not!?
> On 1 Jan 2016 12:03 am, "Patricio Lorente" <patricio.lorente@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Thank you to everyone who responded to my email about the Board’s recent
> > decision. We recognize this is the Board's first removal of a sitting
> > Trustee, and that has led to questions and perhaps some confusion.
> >
> > I wanted to provide you with some additional information in response to
> the
> > discussions on this thread. As many of you know, we did not intend for
> the
> > decision to become public the way it did. We planned to have a discussion
> > and decision in the meeting, but could not be certain of the outcome
> ahead
> > of the final vote. Since the meeting, we have taken our time to work
> > together to make sure the information we share will be accurate,
> > respectful, and informative to the greatest extent possible. At the same
> > time, there is a limit to what the Board can share. We have fiduciary
> > duties, which include Board confidentiality, and we must respect them in
> > this decision as we would in others.
> >
> > I want to be very clear that the Board decision was not about a
> difference
> > of opinion on a matter of WMF direction or strategy between James and the
> > other Trustees. Over the course of the past few months, the Trustees had
> > multiple conversations around expectations for Trustee conduct,
> > responsibilities, and confidentiality. Ultimately, the majority of the
> > Trustees came to the opinion that we were not able to reach a common
> > understanding with James on fulfilling those expectations. We have a duty
> > as a Board to ensure we all abide by our roles and responsibilities as an
> > essential condition for effective governance. I also want to reaffirm
> that
> > this decision was made internally, by the Board, without any outside
> > influence, and according to the process outlined in our Bylaws.
> >
> > Under the Wikimedia Foundation’s Bylaws, and, in accordance with Florida
> > law (where, as a 501(c)(3) charity, the Foundation is registered),
> members
> > of the Board who are selected through community or affiliate elections
> are
> > then appointed to the Board by the existing members. Since all members of
> > the Board are appointed by the Board itself, the Board retains the
> ability
> > to manage its composition as necessary to maintain the working
> environment
> > required to be effective.
> >
> > As someone who was appointed through a community process, I understand
> how
> > important it is to have strong voices from the community on our Board. I
> > want to be absolutely clear that this decision does not change our
> > commitment to engaging with a diverse, talented, opinionated, and
> > representative group of leaders to serve on our Board. It also does not
> > change our commitment to encouraging and hearing different voices on
> > direction and strategy.
> >
> > We are working with the 2015 Elections Committee to fill this vacancy
> with
> > a member of the Wikimedia community. This is a top priority. More
> > information will be available once the Board has had a chance to confer
> > with the 2015 Elections Committee.
> >
> > From our viewpoint, our actions around the removal are concluded. We
> > sincerely hope that James will continue to be an active, constructive
> part
> > of the Wikimedia movement. I personally look forward to continuing
> > collaboration with him.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Patricio
> > --
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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-request@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-request@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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
[Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
Patricio -

I understand that the final decision likely wasn't predecided going in to
the meeting, however, communications responses should have been prepared
for all likely outcomes, including a prepared statement to disseminate
immediately following the removal from the board of Jame Heilman. Even if
he hadn't announced it himself, it should have been anticipated that people
would realize the removal had occurred - I'm aware of relatively few
WMF-related matters, even at a BoT level, that don't eventually leaked if
they aren't promptly announced. When you see a candidate who just lost his
election giving a concession speech, he didn't write it after he heard the
election results - he likely had it 99% finalized days or weeks before he
lost the election (and this is true even of candidates who really, truly
expected to win their election. I was an unpaid WMF comms intern some
years ago, and even then we regularly drafted statements in advance of it
being clear they were needed. Since WMF comms has only become more
professionalized since my time there, I'm positive that this is still
standard practice for major issues for WMF comms. It might be a good idea
to speak with Katherine or someone else in WMF comms to guide the board in
best practices in communication on issues like this in the future.

Additionally, I'd like to correct you on another point: Florida trustees
don't have an absolute duty of confidentiality. I suspected this given the
training I was given before being put on the board of a decently large body
incorporated in California, but just confirmed it with a Florida lawyer.
WMF Trustees have fidicuiary duties to the WMF; in practice, the two main
details this encompasses are (a) a duty of loyalty (an obligation to put
the interests of WMF above the interests of themselves and (b) a duty of
care (an obligation to carry out their trustee-related duties in a way that
an ordinary and prudent person would carry out the management of their own
affairs - or if you're a lawyer etc, a an obligation to carry out your
trustee-related duties in a way that a lawyer of average skill and prudence
would.) Many other duties derive from these two, but don't override them.
Frequently, a duty of confidentiality is involved - for instance,
disclosing material that would hurt WMF in an ongoing lawsuit against WMF
would be a violation of your obligation to maintain confidentiality - but
that obligation only exists (barring an outside contract with another
organization) as a derivative of your duties of loyalty and your duties of
care. If you believe that prompt disclosure of the details of whatever
happen w/r/t James is in the interests of WMF (examples of why it might be
in the interests of WMF: failing to promptly disclose as many details as
reasonably possible could significantly damage comunity trust in WMF, or
generate significant bad press for WMF,) then you most likely don't only
not have a duty of confidentiality that stops you from closing, you may
actually have a positive duty to disclose depending on how significant you
believe that consequences of failing to disclose would be.

I don't have sekrit knowledge about why James was removed, but knowing him,
and reading your last email, I'm going to venture a guess that James may
have wanted WMF board meetings to be more transparent, or he may have
wanted to seek the counsel of community members not on the board about
issues in front of the board. In fact, he may have felt that failing to
seek outside advice on some issues or failing to make WMF board meetings in
general would have represented a violation of his fidicuiary duties of
loyalty and care. I really hope that the Board comes out with a more
complete statement in the immediate future, because speculation about is
going on during a high tension situation like this is never a good thing.
Dariusz would never have opposed his removal if it was 'for cause' if that
cause was something like James violating his fidicuiary duties in the sense
of leaking sensitive details to the press, leaking info to people suing
WMF, engaging in outright theft, etc. I have a feeling that James' removal
did relate to him desiring increased transparency, and that does make me
distinctly nervous,

Andreas: by my reading of that, it would mean that even if he were a
directly elected trustee (and the BoT sees to suggest that he wasn't a
directly elected trustee, but just a community recommended trustee that the
WMF BoT chose to accept) he wouldn't be able to stand in special elections
- e.g., an election to replace his own vacant seat - but seems to suggest
that he would be able to stand in the next set of regular community
elections.

Patricio: I would really invite you to talk with Katherine about how best
to handle board communications issues in the future. This is something
where much more detailed statements should have been prepared in advance,
in case they were needed - if it turned out they weren't needed, it
would've just been a couple hours drafting a statement wasted. In a crisis
comms situation, the absolute *last* thing you want is for people to be
speculating about what's going on behind the scenes. If for some reason
you don't want regular WMF staff to be involved in revamping how the BoT
handles communications, you are totally welcome to hire me to advise the
BoT on comms levels yourself =p, I have relevant crisis comms experience
with several orgs, both movement and non-movement, and would be happy to
sign and follow an NDA, and help ensure that any future board events that
are likely to need movement or external communications are properly
prepared for in advance :p

Best,
KG
-Sent from my mobile rather painfully using voice dictation, so please
excuse typos

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Matthew Flaschen <
matthew.flaschen@gatech.edu
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','matthew.flaschen@gatech.edu');>> wrote:

> On 12/31/2015 08:02 AM, Patricio Lorente wrote:
>
>> Thank you to everyone who responded to my email about the Board’s recent
>> decision. We recognize this is the Board's first removal of a sitting
>> Trustee, and that has led to questions and perhaps some confusion.
>>
>> I wanted to provide you with some additional information in response to
>> the
>> discussions on this thread.
>>
>
> Thank you for providing a clearer picture. I understand the board members
> are bound in what exactly they can say.
>
> I don't have enough information to agree or disagree with the decision you
> made, but I have a better understanding of its basis.
>
> Matt Flaschen
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org');>
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','wikimedia-l-request@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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
TLDR version:

We are not yet convinced James was not removed for doing what he was elected to do.

I have good faith in everyone involved, and the capacity and intent to withhold judgement for a while, but the explanations so far have not helped. This is not transparent enough. As everyone who's been around for a while knows, lack of transparency will cause strife worse than any good faith disagreement.

George William Herbert
Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 31, 2015, at 5:25 PM, Kevin Gorman <kgorman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Patricio -
>
> I understand that the final decision likely wasn't predecided going in to
> the meeting, however, communications responses should have been prepared
> for all likely outcomes, including a prepared statement to disseminate
> immediately following the removal from the board of Jame Heilman. Even if
> he hadn't announced it himself, it should have been anticipated that people
> would realize the removal had occurred - I'm aware of relatively few
> WMF-related matters, even at a BoT level, that don't eventually leaked if
> they aren't promptly announced. When you see a candidate who just lost his
> election giving a concession speech, he didn't write it after he heard the
> election results - he likely had it 99% finalized days or weeks before he
> lost the election (and this is true even of candidates who really, truly
> expected to win their election. I was an unpaid WMF comms intern some
> years ago, and even then we regularly drafted statements in advance of it
> being clear they were needed. Since WMF comms has only become more
> professionalized since my time there, I'm positive that this is still
> standard practice for major issues for WMF comms. It might be a good idea
> to speak with Katherine or someone else in WMF comms to guide the board in
> best practices in communication on issues like this in the future.
>
> Additionally, I'd like to correct you on another point: Florida trustees
> don't have an absolute duty of confidentiality. I suspected this given the
> training I was given before being put on the board of a decently large body
> incorporated in California, but just confirmed it with a Florida lawyer.
> WMF Trustees have fidicuiary duties to the WMF; in practice, the two main
> details this encompasses are (a) a duty of loyalty (an obligation to put
> the interests of WMF above the interests of themselves and (b) a duty of
> care (an obligation to carry out their trustee-related duties in a way that
> an ordinary and prudent person would carry out the management of their own
> affairs - or if you're a lawyer etc, a an obligation to carry out your
> trustee-related duties in a way that a lawyer of average skill and prudence
> would.) Many other duties derive from these two, but don't override them.
> Frequently, a duty of confidentiality is involved - for instance,
> disclosing material that would hurt WMF in an ongoing lawsuit against WMF
> would be a violation of your obligation to maintain confidentiality - but
> that obligation only exists (barring an outside contract with another
> organization) as a derivative of your duties of loyalty and your duties of
> care. If you believe that prompt disclosure of the details of whatever
> happen w/r/t James is in the interests of WMF (examples of why it might be
> in the interests of WMF: failing to promptly disclose as many details as
> reasonably possible could significantly damage comunity trust in WMF, or
> generate significant bad press for WMF,) then you most likely don't only
> not have a duty of confidentiality that stops you from closing, you may
> actually have a positive duty to disclose depending on how significant you
> believe that consequences of failing to disclose would be.
>
> I don't have sekrit knowledge about why James was removed, but knowing him,
> and reading your last email, I'm going to venture a guess that James may
> have wanted WMF board meetings to be more transparent, or he may have
> wanted to seek the counsel of community members not on the board about
> issues in front of the board. In fact, he may have felt that failing to
> seek outside advice on some issues or failing to make WMF board meetings in
> general would have represented a violation of his fidicuiary duties of
> loyalty and care. I really hope that the Board comes out with a more
> complete statement in the immediate future, because speculation about is
> going on during a high tension situation like this is never a good thing.
> Dariusz would never have opposed his removal if it was 'for cause' if that
> cause was something like James violating his fidicuiary duties in the sense
> of leaking sensitive details to the press, leaking info to people suing
> WMF, engaging in outright theft, etc. I have a feeling that James' removal
> did relate to him desiring increased transparency, and that does make me
> distinctly nervous,
>
> Andreas: by my reading of that, it would mean that even if he were a
> directly elected trustee (and the BoT sees to suggest that he wasn't a
> directly elected trustee, but just a community recommended trustee that the
> WMF BoT chose to accept) he wouldn't be able to stand in special elections
> - e.g., an election to replace his own vacant seat - but seems to suggest
> that he would be able to stand in the next set of regular community
> elections.
>
> Patricio: I would really invite you to talk with Katherine about how best
> to handle board communications issues in the future. This is something
> where much more detailed statements should have been prepared in advance,
> in case they were needed - if it turned out they weren't needed, it
> would've just been a couple hours drafting a statement wasted. In a crisis
> comms situation, the absolute *last* thing you want is for people to be
> speculating about what's going on behind the scenes. If for some reason
> you don't want regular WMF staff to be involved in revamping how the BoT
> handles communications, you are totally welcome to hire me to advise the
> BoT on comms levels yourself =p, I have relevant crisis comms experience
> with several orgs, both movement and non-movement, and would be happy to
> sign and follow an NDA, and help ensure that any future board events that
> are likely to need movement or external communications are properly
> prepared for in advance :p
>
> Best,
> KG
> -Sent from my mobile rather painfully using voice dictation, so please
> excuse typos
>
> On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Matthew Flaschen <
> matthew.flaschen@gatech.edu
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','matthew.flaschen@gatech.edu');>> wrote:
>
>>> On 12/31/2015 08:02 AM, Patricio Lorente wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you to everyone who responded to my email about the Board’s recent
>>> decision. We recognize this is the Board's first removal of a sitting
>>> Trustee, and that has led to questions and perhaps some confusion.
>>>
>>> I wanted to provide you with some additional information in response to
>>> the
>>> discussions on this thread.
>>
>> Thank you for providing a clearer picture. I understand the board members
>> are bound in what exactly they can say.
>>
>> I don't have enough information to agree or disagree with the decision you
>> made, but I have a better understanding of its basis.
>>
>> Matt Flaschen
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org');>
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','wikimedia-l-request@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-request@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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
I just want to echo this.

James, I do know you personally, and am better for it. Thank you for your
tireless efforts to improve information and health around the world, and for
the thought you give to how the projects can flourish and multiply.

Warmly,
Sj


On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Anna Stillwell <astillwell@wikimedia.org>
wrote:

> James,
>
> We’ve never spoken. I don’t know you personally, but I do know your
> reputation throughout the movement. It is stellar. You are reported to be a
> man of coherent and consistent principles.
>
> I am writing to thank you for your years of service and your amazing
> contributions to the projects thus far. I was so impressed with the work
> that you've done on "ebola content" and translating it for the languages in
> the geographies most impacted.
>
> I don’t know what happened, but this has to be difficult for you. My
> thoughts are with you.
>
> Warmly,
> /a
_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
Hi Patricio,


I am saddened to hear that the discussions about governance had to result
in removal of a board member.

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 6:32 PM, Patricio Lorente <
patricio.lorente@gmail.com> wrote:

> Over the course of the past few months, the Trustees had
> multiple conversations around expectations for Trustee conduct,
> responsibilities, and confidentiality. Ultimately, the majority of the
> Trustees came to the opinion that we were not able to reach a common
> understanding with James on fulfilling those expectations.
>

It would be useful for the community to know the revised code of conduct,
responsibilities, which the board has agreed on. If such a thing is not
available, it would also help if you can inform the date by which it is
available. This would also help for any potential candidates for the next
election/appointment.

Best regards

Arjuna Rao Chavala
_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board [ In reply to ]
I agree.
The situation may well be metastable, in that the WMF may get away with alienating the crowd for a long time, until it reaches a tipping point, when the reaction becomes catastrophic and non-reversible. At which point there will be a large number of people who will say they told them so, but it may well be too late to reassemble the debris. Something will survive , but maybe not Wikipedia as we know it. How far we are from the tipping point is anybody's guess. At present the vast majority of the crowd are probably totally unaware of the problems, but I personally would not bet the survival of Wikipedia against them staying and continuing to produce for free if there was a major walkout by the volunteers who currently keep the show on the road. Will the level of donations remain viable if the general public witnesses a meltdown? Would you bet on it?
Cheers,
Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Tim Landscheidt
Sent: Thursday, 31 December 2015 9:20 PM
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

"Peter Southwood" <peter.southwood@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> You are quite correct, we cannot force the board to respond. However
> if they don't we are free to vote with our feet - or not. The
> fundamental rule of crowdsourcing is 'do not alienate your crowd'.
> They tread a delicate line, whatever they do is going to annoy
> somebody.
> […]

By mid-December, they had crowdsourced USD 18.000.000 in this campaign, so they seem to be on the right track. If volunteer editors would leave in a significant number, the effect would be the same that we have seen for MediaWiki
development: "We need to raise /more/ money to employ some- one to edit and update articles. You want to keep Wikipedia alive, don't you?"

All threats against the board or WMF in general are power- less unless there is a viable alternative to Wikipedia for volunteers that is /better/; at the moment there is not even a clone that provides just the same data.

Tim


_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11298 - Release Date: 12/31/15


_______________________________________________
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-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  View All