Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

He isn't asking Dariusz to leave the board, but the position of chair of a particular committee on it. While I have no idea if this is called for either, it seems an important distinction. -I On 03/05/16 04:23, Anthony Cole wrote: Fae, I can see no reason for Dariusz to leave the board. He

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

That Dariusz is willing to engage with the community is very positive. The issues that occurred around the selecting of Arnnon are complicated and I agree with Dariusz were more systemic in nature. I do not see the movement as being well served by him stepping down. James On Tue, May 3, 2016 at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

Fae, I can see no reason for Dariusz to leave the board. He seems to be decent and intelligent. The Arnnon thing was an error but it was clearly part of a broader problem. Yes, they all need training but that seems to be in the works. I hope he stays, and is re-elected if he chooses to run next

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:21 AM, Fæ wrote: > [...] With regard to "[the WMF board] delivering services that are of a high > quality", all the metrics that the WMF report show the opposite. The > WMF consistently fail to meet the performance targets they set for > themselves, as

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

> > That's great. Please do the right thing and take the initiative to > step down from the volunteer position of chair, so that someone with a > history of excellent judgment on trustee governance can take the > position. Again, *you* may think it's a good idea. I regard Dariusz to be one of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

Hoi, Really. We have had a rough patch where management and people in the WMF were at odds. We have a rough patch where people for all kinds of reason decide to no longer be a member of the WMF board. It is no wonder that things are not as they should be as a consequence. When you add the

[Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

opics: > >1. Re: Crisis of Confidence (Dariusz Jemielniak) >2. Re: Crisis of Confidence (Fæ) >3. Re: What New Thing is WMF Doing w. Cookies, & Why is Legal > Involved? (Pete Forsyth) > > > ---------

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

On 2 May 2016 at 15:17, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote: ... >> Am I right that you were the chair of the governance committee >> >> responsible for recommending Arnnon to the board and that you are >> still in that position? Why are you still involved in the governance >> process if

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

Dariusz*, * Thank you for continuing to engage with the community. Responding to highly critical voices in the movement is not fun. Beside the highly critical voices on the mailing list, there are many people who read this list and appreciate communication from you. Warm regards, Sydney Poore

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

Hello Fae, From my perspective, Dariusz is committed to improving the governance of Board. But, he is in a volunteer position, and is limited in the percentage of his time that he can devote to WMF Board business. Even if he personally was devoting 60 hours a week to reforming the Board, it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Fæ wrote: > Your email fits perfectly with my description of the WMF board: "have > not apologized or even changed a single part of their governance > processes, despite vague unmeasurable offers to look into it." I'm not sure if it is typical

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

Hi Dariusz, Your email fits perfectly with my description of the WMF board: "have not apologized or even changed a single part of their governance processes, despite vague unmeasurable offers to look into it." After many months there is no *commitment* to a date for any change to governance, nor

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

02.05.2016 5:22 AM "Fæ" napisał(a): > > Perhaps we could stick to facts? > > In the very recent case of Arnnon Geshuri, the WMF board of trustees > proved themselves to be completely out of touch with the > community.[1][2] 314 Wikimedians took part in the vote of no >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

Perhaps we could stick to facts? In the very recent case of Arnnon Geshuri, the WMF board of trustees proved themselves to be completely out of touch with the community.[1][2] 314 Wikimedians took part in the vote of no confidence, hardly just "malcontents", and 95% of those that took part voted

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

Hoi, The most important thing about the board and the WMF is that they enable what we do. The dependence on them delivering services that are of a high quality is something they deliver. At the same time there is a coterie of "Wikipedians" that want to remake the WMF in their own image. They have

[Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

It seems that the engagement between the Board and the Community has broken down, to the point that there may be a crisis of confidence developing. Perhaps members of this list would care to express their views at