On 7/14/2010 12:28 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > The problem with behaviour that is not good / acceptable is that at some > stage it will be recognised and it will kill off the people in a similar way > as to Essjay. The best indication that such things can happen is the upset > of our capable, competent and upright former chair. I was convinced that he > would be re-elected and I would have welcomed his re-election. I am thankful that Gerard thinks well of me, but to disclaim a bit of the context, let me say that I can't imagine that either money or corruption had any impact whatsoever on the process. Politics? Sure, but only in the sense that human interactions in any institutional setting are necessarily political. I prefer his subsequent description of Phoebe as a wonderful person who I expect will be a fine board member.
In more general terms, speaking not just of the board selection, I think a highly charged and inflammatory concept like "corruption" is not well-suited to describing the situation. It's fair to be concerned about it, and the potential distorting influences of money, but the problems I have heard about usually do not fit that description. Both the chapters and the Wikimedia Foundation occasionally must resist undue influences from outside; both could work to improve their relationship with each other; and both still need to mature as organizations. The foundation may be a bit further along on the last point, and hopefully the chapters can learn from those experiences. I know the chapters have sometimes faced their own internal challenges, but they seem typical of young organizations that are just learning how to function appropriately. While I agree with the other comments that whistle-blowing should be protected, from my experience it seems like the need for it is relatively low in this case - by that I mean I've been aware of chapter leaders discussing internal concerns that arise and seeking advice when they need it, rather than dismissing the idea. As the movement grows and develops, we may find better ways of auditing that kind of performance. For now, it seems like the right thing for chapters to focus on figuring out what they should be doing, and learning from mistakes as they come up. --Michael Snow _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
