On Tue, 25 May 2021 at 21:01, Chris Keating <chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Just to note that "Co-opted directors are not lesser, inferior, or less >> capable than elected board members or hold any less of a mandate, nor should >> they be perceived to be" is an opinion rather than fact. > > > Not really. It's a fact that nothing in the Wikimedia UK constitution, > Charity Commission guidance, or the law differentiates the roles of trustees > who are elected or appointed.
Yes, nobody can make a clear statement about the *perceptions* of the members unless they are asked. >> >> Elections exist for the express purpose of providing a mandate. > > > Again, according to the articles of association, elections exist for the > express purpose of selecting trustees. There is no concept of a 'mandate' in > charity law. This seems very tangential considering that the CC was not being quoted. The dictionary definition of mandate puts it in the context of elections, the concept of elections and votes is about creating a mandate. "Mandate" is not charity law but as was pointed out, there is no requirement to have elections anyway, so no mandate and no democratic process, if this is about what the *minimum* in law is. Again discussing CC guidelines is a tangent. Though trustees might be elected, the basic point of this thread is that they are also co-opted, so the statement about "express purpose of selecting trustees" is incomplete without adding "except for co-opted trustees". >> >> The change is worthy of discussion among the trustees > > > I imagine they have discussed the matter, though that is pure supposition on > my part. > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
