Welcome back Maria. Recent events have shed a much-needed bright light on the board, and it would have been good to hold a community election in that light. We do have a limited volunteer capacity to manage elections, though, and I can understand the desire not to impose too much on volunteer goodwill. A shame, though. We all might have learned something from the process.
On Saturday, 30 January 2016, Todd Allen <[email protected]> wrote: > So, why not make the best of both worlds? > > If you need another Trustee immediately, well...I don't really think that, > you have a quorum without it. And an appointed trustee who lost a community > election is not a community elected trustee. It is insulting to say that > they are. James Heilman was the community trustee, and we still have been > given absolutely no specifics about his removal, just vague handwaves at > "lack of trust". Why, specifically, did he lose your trust? What, > specifically, did he supposedly do wrong? > > But if the seat absolutely must be filled, make this an interim appointment > until a new election is complete, and hold such an election as soon as > possible. A new election is necessary, and not having one is unacceptable. > A lot has changed since the last one, and the individual you appointed did > not pass the previous election. > > Or in other words: This is still not acceptable. > > Todd > > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Adam Wight <[email protected] > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 6:09 PM Tomasz W. Kozlowski < > > [email protected] <javascript:;>> > > wrote: > > > > > Considering the results of the 2015 May Board elections, I think it > fair > > > to say that María’s appointment to the Board lacks any community > > legitimacy > > > whatsoever. > > > > > > I have to disagree with this statement. Please see my analysis of the > > election, where I show that Sefidari would have been the top-ranked > > candidate if we had counted votes equally.[1] The "oppose" votes you > refer > > to are not serving the purpose you imagine they are, of weeding out > > controversial candidates. > > > > Yet another hugely surprising decision from the Board, I’m sorry to say. > > > > > > > That's another story... It would be nice to read the minutes of this > Board > > discussion, to see what alternatives were raised and how they were > > evaluated. It would be even nicer if the broader community had been > > directly involved in deciding how to backfill their hatcheted > > representative's seat. > > > > -Adam > > [[mw:User:Adamw]] > > > > [1] > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Adamw/Draft/Board_Election_analysis > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > New messages to: [email protected] <javascript:;> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:[email protected] <javascript:;> > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: [email protected] <javascript:;> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected] <javascript:;> > ?subject=unsubscribe> -- Anthony Cole _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
