Delirium, 23/10/2013 13:33:
From my perspective as someone not really involved in either the WMF or chapters (or other committees), but just an editor and a community member, I tend to see the WMF as "special"
Note that I wasn't saying it isn't "special" in some way, I was just saying that *that* argument didn't IMHO add good reasons for the WMF being special as regards this specific point, i.e. using a process which the WMF itself has created and which the WMF supposedly believes useful, given how much it has invested in it.
in this sense because it already has a Board of Trustees that in a fairly reasonable way represent the community/movement,
This argument is a slippery slope and for this reason I was not touching it. Anyway, note that the most voted elected member of the FDC has received more votes than the most voted WMF board elected member. ;-)
Nemo
who I trust to make decisions on funding priorities. Therefore it's not clear to me why *another* advisory board should be a second layer of bureaucracy evaluating its budget proposals. They are already evaluated by the Trustees primarily, and by the community as a whole secondarily, which seems like enough oversight. If the community disagrees with the WMF's direction or priorities, they can vote for different trustees in the next election, or otherwise suggest changes in its structure or membership. But in general I trust their judgment on how to allocate the Foundation's money in accordance with the mission. Best, Mark _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list 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 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
