On 1 February 2012 18:17, Theo10011 <de10...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > In what way do chapter-selected seats improve the running of the WMF, > > Thomas? The Board has no say in who is being selected, and there is no > > basis in fact to say that those appointed by the chapters are any more > > effective or helpful in meeting the Board's goals or running the WMF than > > would community-elected Wikimedians. > > > Risker, you know the point applies to appointed members of the board as > well. They are selected through even a more private process for seemingly > unlimited terms, they make up the other half of the board. I am surprised > why questions about their interest and representation aren't raised on > every new appointment? > > The chapter selected member, at least go through a vetting and a voting > process that is open to several chapters and thousand of members. > >
The appointed members of the Board are chosen for their specific expertise and skill-set. The Board does publicly identify the slots it is trying to fill when looking for appointees, and the qualifications that they require. The chapter-selected seats...nobody knows what criteria are being used, what specific expertise is being sought, what skill-set is being selected for. The end result, as best I can see from the first two rounds, is "the same people who could easily have run for election, because they're well known and widely active in the community". Risker/Anne _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
