On 10/09/11 9:58 AM, Risker wrote: > On 9 October 2011 12:48, Federico Leva (Nemo)<nemow...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Risker, 09/10/2011 18:40: >>> The primary responsibility of Board members is to the Foundation, not to >>> the community or the chapters or to any other external agent. >> I find this response a bit odd. ;-) It almost seems to assume that the >> community (or Nathan?) is likely wanting to elect someone the WMF >> couldn't accept, or that "responsibility to the community" is a bad >> thing, while we used to say only that there's no imperative mandate and >> that chapters-elected trustees are not chapters representatives, etc. > I'm not sure what you find odd about it, but it is factual. > > The key point is that board members must work on behalf of the Foundation, > and must not act as representatives of a particular constituency, and those > constituencies cannot direct board members elected/nominated by them to act > in certain ways. > > It's not the factuality of the statement that is odd. The Hong Kong style of democracy that insures that the elected members can never form a majority is.
In a fully democratic country all elected representatives work on behalf of the country, but they still represent particular constituencies and/or parties, to which they are accountable. Without that the entire notion of constituencies is a sham. When they fail to represent the interests of their constituencies they should be voted out. Ray _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
