Dear Anthony, The community elected Denny knowing that he worked at Google <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/Board_elections/2015/Candidates#Denny_Vrande.C4.8Di.C4.87_.28Denny.29> .
If this was an additional conflict of interest taken on after his election then things might be different, but this looks to me something better resolved by declaring the interest and recusing from relevant votes and discussions. I'm not entirely happy with the current board and especially the loss of Doc James. Unless I've missed it neither the GLAM nor Medical sectors now have an advocate on the board, but removing an elected board member for a conflict of interest that was declared in his election statement would not make sense to me. There is a wider issue that we also have people who have previously been connected to various other organisations whose strategies might impinge on ours. Do we or should we have some sort of break requirement such as requiring directors to recuse from decisions involving recent former employers? ~~~~ > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Pierre-Selim asked: "Are you suggesting the removal of another communitee > selected board member?" > > I'm sure Denny would make a fine adviser. But having a voting board member > who is paid by Google, who in turn is almost the (and would like to be the) > monopoly commercial vendor of knowledge to the world, strikes me as wrong. > That's much too close an embrace. > > > Anthony Cole > > > _______________________________________________ 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-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
