U18 Directors

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
18 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

U18 Directors

Andrew Turvey-2
To Chris Wood - Great to know that you're keen to get involved and I agree with others that we should try to be as inclusive as possible.

With only two days to go until close of nominations, I think it's too late to change this rule - that has already been agreed by consensus - that only 18+s can be candidates for the initial board.

However, one of the first things the new Board will do is draft the rules of the chapter - its Memorandum and Article of Association - which i guess will include details of the voting system for members of the subsequent Boards - so please do input there. I personally hope we can come up with a situation which allows 16-18s to be members of the Board but also satisfies the Charities Commission. As you already mentioned, the legal restriction is that Limited Company Directors have to be 16+ but the Charities Commission also has the power to intervene if they fear "mismanagement" of the charity. I've put more details up at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK_v2.0/Candidate_FAQs#Why_do_Board_candidates_have_to_be_over_18.3F

There is nothing to prevent you from putting your name up on the list, but the election committee will probably decide to invalidate your candidacy.

While we're on that subject I presume that everyone is happy for - geni, Andrew Whitworth and Jo Seddon - to be the election committee. In that case, I'll put details up on the wiki. Also, is it the consensus that we drop the 50% rule?

As to guarantor members, I am not aware of any legal restriction on the age of members. I can't think of any reason we would want to restrict it to over 18s, but I guess this is a decision for the inital Board in consultation with the community.

Alison made an interesting point about it being a good idea if all intial Board members had lived in the same place for three years, weren't private renters, had bills in their own name, were in full time employement, had no CCJs and were UK passport holders. I wouldn't want any of these to be a requirement for someone to be a Board member and I don't think it would be fair to introduce this at this stage, but I've added it as a "voluntary question" here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK_v2.0/Candidate_questions as it might be useful for voters.

Finally, someone mentioned it wouldnt' be a problem if a person who was a potential risk to children got hold of a U16's address because it would be their parent's address. My though was, they may also be able to get their phone number, email address, IRC contact, facebook/myspace page etc etc - you'd be surprised how much information is readily available. That's the issue I think we should be careful of.
 
Andrew Turvey


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: U18 Directors

joseph seddon
> Alison made an interesting point about it being a good idea if all intial Board members
> had lived in the same place for three years, weren't private renters, had bills in their
> own name, were in full time employement, had no CCJs and were UK passport holders.
> I wouldn't want any of these to be a requirement for someone to be a Board member
> and I don't think it would be fair to introduce this at this stage, but I've added it as a
> as it might be useful for voters.
 
I want to clarify and support alison's point, this is the correct advice to follow so that we
can get a bank account. Alison is very right in that the banks will expect most of this of signatories
opening a bank account. Prehaps not all, but certainly most of what she has said.


Get Hotmail on your mobile from Vodafone Try it Now
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: U18 Directors

Mike Peel

On 11 Sep 2008, at 22:27, joseph seddon wrote:

> > Alison made an interesting point about it being a good idea if  
> all intial Board members
> > had lived in the same place for three years, weren't private  
> renters, had bills in their
> > own name, were in full time employement, had no CCJs and were UK  
> passport holders.
> > I wouldn't want any of these to be a requirement for someone to  
> be a Board member
> > and I don't think it would be fair to introduce this at this  
> stage, but I've added it as a
> > "voluntary question" here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ 
> Wikimedia_UK_v2.0/Candidate_questions
> > as it might be useful for voters.
>
> I want to clarify and support alison's point, this is the correct  
> advice to follow so that we
> can get a bank account. Alison is very right in that the banks will  
> expect most of this of signatories
> opening a bank account. Prehaps not all, but certainly most of what  
> she has said.


Do you have a feel for which of these banks will expect, and to what  
degree? As someone that lives in two places (parent's home and rented  
accommodation) and has bills at the latter, and is a postgraduate  
student (i.e. on the fuzzy line between student and employee), but  
meets the other two points, I'm wondering if I fall between too many  
lines to be useful on the initial board.

Mike Peel

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: U18 Directors

Thomas Dalton
> Do you have a feel for which of these banks will expect, and to what
> degree? As someone that lives in two places (parent's home and rented
> accommodation) and has bills at the latter, and is a postgraduate
> student (i.e. on the fuzzy line between student and employee), but
> meets the other two points, I'm wondering if I fall between too many
> lines to be useful on the initial board.

I'm going to drop in on a few banks tomorrow (as a couple of people
have already done, but the more we know the better) and will either
talk to someone that knows about charity accounts or make an
appointment for another time with each. One of the key things I'll be
asking is about their requirements for trustees/signatories, so
hopefully I'll be able to post a report with more info tomorrow
evening. I'm in a similar position to you (although I'm actually back
at my parents now and living in uni accommodation during term time).
It sounds like WER only got as far as applying to one bank (Co-op), so
others may have less stringent requirements, we'll see. If it turns
out the elected board are unable to open a bank account, they do as
much of the other stuff as they can and call an AGM and a new board
with better credit histories can take over. It will delay things by a
few months, but it's not the end of the world.

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: U18 Directors

Thomas Dalton
In reply to this post by Andrew Turvey-2
> While we're on that subject I presume that everyone is happy for - geni,
> Andrew Whitworth and Jo Seddon - to be the election committee. In that case,
> I'll put details up on the wiki. Also, is it the consensus that we drop the
> 50% rule?

I agree to both points. I'm not sure if we have a consensus on them
yet, but ask here and the talk page and if no-one objects by the
deadline, we're go for the election.

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

50% vote required or not? (Re: U18 Directors)

Ross Gardler
Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> While we're on that subject I presume that everyone is happy for - geni,
>> Andrew Whitworth and Jo Seddon - to be the election committee. In that case,
>> I'll put details up on the wiki. Also, is it the consensus that we drop the
>> 50% rule?
>
> I agree to both points. I'm not sure if we have a consensus on them
> yet, but ask here and the talk page and if no-one objects by the
> deadline, we're go for the election.

I'm in agreement with the committee.

I'm concerned (not objecting) about the 50% rule being dropped, but
perhaps not for the reason people would expect.

The board are going to be empowered to do anything they like. The
community are going to be asked to put their trust in these people.

Suppose someone gets onto the board with less than the majority of the
communty approving of them.

Now suppose something goes wrong for an unavoidable reason.

The natural reaction of people is to look for someone/something to
blame. In an online community where it is possible to hide behind the
screen the worst in people comes out and things get said that perhaps
would not be said in a face to face situation. Any candidate with less
than a 50% approval will almost certainly become a pivot point for the
community. Issue like "why was the board elected without a majority of
community membmers supporting the members?". The community will split at
a time when it most needs to pull together.

Now if the majority of people here think I'm being over careful I'll
drop it. My intention is to raise this concern, if you decide to drop
the 50% rule and something like the above scenario pans out at least you
can watch for the early signs of that split.

The likelyhood is that it will not pan out that way, but forewarned is
forearmed.

Ross

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 50% vote required or not? (Re: U18 Directors)

Thomas Dalton
> I'm concerned (not objecting) about the 50% rule being dropped, but
> perhaps not for the reason people would expect.
>
> The board are going to be empowered to do anything they like. The
> community are going to be asked to put their trust in these people.
>
> Suppose someone gets onto the board with less than the majority of the
> communty approving of them.
>
> Now suppose something goes wrong for an unavoidable reason.
>
> The natural reaction of people is to look for someone/something to
> blame. In an online community where it is possible to hide behind the
> screen the worst in people comes out and things get said that perhaps
> would not be said in a face to face situation. Any candidate with less
> than a 50% approval will almost certainly become a pivot point for the
> community. Issue like "why was the board elected without a majority of
> community membmers supporting the members?". The community will split at
> a time when it most needs to pull together.
>
> Now if the majority of people here think I'm being over careful I'll
> drop it. My intention is to raise this concern, if you decide to drop
> the 50% rule and something like the above scenario pans out at least you
> can watch for the early signs of that split.

I understand your concerns, but what's the alternative? If we don't
get at least 3 people with 50+% what do we do? Holding another
election isn't likely to help, it will just get the same result. If we
get 3 people with 50+% but not 5, then it's not really a problem since
the 3 that have wide support will have a controlling majority anyway
(assuming everyone turns up to meetings, at least). Remember, we're
not really trusting this board with much since we don't have anything
to trust them with yet. The worst they can do is waste a few months.
(At some point, they'll be receiving membership fees, but if they get
that far then they've probably earned everyone's trust.)

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 50% vote required or not? (Re: U18 Directors)

Ross Gardler
Thomas Dalton wrote:

>> I'm concerned (not objecting) about the 50% rule being dropped, but
>> perhaps not for the reason people would expect.
>>
>> The board are going to be empowered to do anything they like. The
>> community are going to be asked to put their trust in these people.
>>
>> Suppose someone gets onto the board with less than the majority of the
>> communty approving of them.
>>
>> Now suppose something goes wrong for an unavoidable reason.
>>
>> The natural reaction of people is to look for someone/something to
>> blame. In an online community where it is possible to hide behind the
>> screen the worst in people comes out and things get said that perhaps
>> would not be said in a face to face situation. Any candidate with less
>> than a 50% approval will almost certainly become a pivot point for the
>> community. Issue like "why was the board elected without a majority of
>> community membmers supporting the members?". The community will split at
>> a time when it most needs to pull together.
>>
>> Now if the majority of people here think I'm being over careful I'll
>> drop it. My intention is to raise this concern, if you decide to drop
>> the 50% rule and something like the above scenario pans out at least you
>> can watch for the early signs of that split.
>
> I understand your concerns, but what's the alternative?

I don't have one which is why I explicitly didn't object.

Ross

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 50% vote required or not? (Re: U18 Directors)

Sam Korn
In reply to this post by Thomas Dalton
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 11:50 PM, Thomas Dalton <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I understand your concerns, but what's the alternative?

Something other than approval voting -- either simply "support" voting
or a ranking system.

That seems unnecessary to me, however.

--
Sam
PGP public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sam_Korn/public_key

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 50% vote required or not? (Re: U18 Directors)

Thomas Dalton
2008/9/12 Sam Korn <[hidden email]>:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 11:50 PM, Thomas Dalton <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I understand your concerns, but what's the alternative?
>
> Something other than approval voting -- either simply "support" voting
> or a ranking system.
>
> That seems unnecessary to me, however.

What is "support voting"? Any kind of preferential voting is far too
complicated to be worth it in our case - you generally end up needing
a computer program to calculate the results (or a hell of a lot of
post it notes!).

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 50% vote required or not? (Re: U18 Directors)

Sam Korn
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 12:16 AM, Thomas Dalton <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 2008/9/12 Sam Korn <[hidden email]>:
>> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 11:50 PM, Thomas Dalton <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> I understand your concerns, but what's the alternative?
>>
>> Something other than approval voting -- either simply "support" voting
>> or a ranking system.
>>
>> That seems unnecessary to me, however.
>
> What is "support voting"? Any kind of preferential voting is far too
> complicated to be worth it in our case - you generally end up needing
> a computer program to calculate the results (or a hell of a lot of
> post it notes!).

I was meaning a simple lack of opposition.  Maybe I am
misunderstanding what is currently the proposal?

--
Sam
PGP public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sam_Korn/public_key

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 50% vote required or not? (Re: U18 Directors)

joseph seddon

> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 12:16 AM, Thomas Dalton <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > 2008/9/12 Sam Korn <[hidden email]>:
> >> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 11:50 PM, Thomas Dalton <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>> I understand your concerns, but what's the alternative?
> >>
> >> Something other than approval voting -- either simply "support" voting
> >> or a ranking system.
> >>
> >> That seems unnecessary to me, however.
> >
> > What is "support voting"? Any kind of preferential voting is far too
> > complicated to be worth it in our case - you generally end up needing
> > a computer program to calculate the results (or a hell of a lot of
> > post it notes!).
>
> I was meaning a simple lack of opposition. Maybe I am
> misunderstanding what is currently the proposal?
>

Me, Geni and andrew will discuss what options we have. We will then
draw up the final election methods. Clear them with the community, then
run the election. Unless we can get access to the software used for the
foundation board elections, it will most likely be run via email.




Get Hotmail on your mobile from Vodafone Try it Now
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 50% vote required or not? (Re: U18 Directors)

Thomas Dalton
In reply to this post by Sam Korn
2008/9/12 Sam Korn <[hidden email]>:

> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 12:16 AM, Thomas Dalton <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> 2008/9/12 Sam Korn <[hidden email]>:
>>> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 11:50 PM, Thomas Dalton <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> I understand your concerns, but what's the alternative?
>>>
>>> Something other than approval voting -- either simply "support" voting
>>> or a ranking system.
>>>
>>> That seems unnecessary to me, however.
>>
>> What is "support voting"? Any kind of preferential voting is far too
>> complicated to be worth it in our case - you generally end up needing
>> a computer program to calculate the results (or a hell of a lot of
>> post it notes!).
>
> I was meaning a simple lack of opposition.  Maybe I am
> misunderstanding what is currently the proposal?

That sounds like approval voting to me. Approval voting is where you
have a list of candidates and you tick the ones you approve of, those
with the most votes win.

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 50% vote required or not? (Re: U18 Directors)

Cary Bass-4
In reply to this post by joseph seddon
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

joseph seddon wrote:

>
>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 12:16 AM, Thomas Dalton
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > 2008/9/12 Sam Korn <[hidden email]>:
>> >> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 11:50 PM, Thomas Dalton
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>> I understand your concerns, but what's the alternative?
>> >>
>> >> Something other than approval voting -- either simply "support" voting
>> >> or a ranking system.
>> >>
>> >> That seems unnecessary to me, however.
>> >
>> > What is "support voting"? Any kind of preferential voting is far too
>> > complicated to be worth it in our case - you generally end up needing
>> > a computer program to calculate the results (or a hell of a lot of
>> > post it notes!).
>>
>> I was meaning a simple lack of opposition. Maybe I am
>> misunderstanding what is currently the proposal?
>>
>
> Me, Geni and andrew will discuss what options we have. We will then
> draw up the final election methods. Clear them with the community, then
> run the election. Unless we can get access to the software used for the
> foundation board elections, it will most likely be run via email.

I don't know if it matters, but KTC was on the foundation board
elections committee.

- --
Cary Bass
Volunteer Coordinator

Your continued donations keep Wikipedia running! Support the Wikimedia
Foundation today: http://donate.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
Phone: 415.839.6885 x 601
Fax: 415.882.0495

E-Mail: [hidden email]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkjJsKsACgkQyQg4JSymDYnV1ACgjku12MNlQvvwIL+oU7MSGr8z
qpwAnjdvuiyhH8PQzKAWCTnvcfVtMM9P
=MGnR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 50% vote required or not? (Re: U18 Directors)

Katie Chan
In reply to this post by joseph seddon
On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 23:22 +0000, joseph seddon wrote:


> Me, Geni and andrew will discuss what options we have. We will then
> draw up the final election methods. Clear them with the community,
> then
> run the election. Unless we can get access to the software used for
> the
> foundation board elections, it will most likely be run via email.

Getting BoardVote isn't hard. It's just on Mediawiki's SVN. The first
thing is upgrading it from using BotQuery (query.php) which has been
disabled on Wikimedia's wiki to the current api.php (a task which is
relatively simple).

You can choose to merge back some of the old code using SVN to use the
old voting method (A maximum of X endorsement out of all possible
candidates, first many past the post) if you don't want to use Schulze
method.

The problem you will have is hosting it on a MediaWiki installation
somewhere, and ensuring those and only those you want to be able to vote
is able to vote, either each with local accounts on said MediaWiki
installation, or get WMF's dev to redirect anyone going to
*.wiki*edia.org/wiki/BoardVote to this wiki so the software can query
WMF's wiki for account information.

KTC

--
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
  - Heinrich Heine

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 50% vote required or not? (Re: U18 Directors)

Thomas Dalton
> The problem you will have is hosting it on a MediaWiki installation
> somewhere, and ensuring those and only those you want to be able to vote
> is able to vote, either each with local accounts on said MediaWiki
> installation, or get WMF's dev to redirect anyone going to
> *.wiki*edia.org/wiki/BoardVote to this wiki so the software can query
> WMF's wiki for account information.

We could ask the devs to create a wiki for us (uk.wikimedia.org) and
run it on that. We're not too picky about who gets to vote (if you're
interested enough to vote, you're welcome to), so that's not a
problem.

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 50% vote required or not? (Re: U18 Directors)

Katie Chan
On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 01:05 +0100, Thomas Dalton wrote:

> > The problem you will have is hosting it on a MediaWiki installation
> > somewhere, and ensuring those and only those you want to be able to vote
> > is able to vote, either each with local accounts on said MediaWiki
> > installation, or get WMF's dev to redirect anyone going to
> > *.wiki*edia.org/wiki/BoardVote to this wiki so the software can query
> > WMF's wiki for account information.
>
> We could ask the devs to create a wiki for us (uk.wikimedia.org) and
> run it on that. We're not too picky about who gets to vote (if you're
> interested enough to vote, you're welcome to), so that's not a
> problem.
Just a general note (for anyone who think IP address is private
information *rolleyes*) if one is using BoardVote that the election
official will get to see the browser user agent string and the IP
address of those who's voted.

KTC

--
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
  - Heinrich Heine

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: U18 Directors

Christopher Wood (Student)
In reply to this post by Andrew Turvey-2

Hi Andrew sorry for not getting back as quickly as possible it just the fact that I was in bed when this email was sent. Anyway  yes I agree with what Alison has said and take that on board. I would like to say that if the Board decides that I am able to sit on the board under 18 then I am happy but if they feel that I should be 18 then I also accept that. I will still continue to be involved but from the backseat so to speak.

 

Chris

 


From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Andrew Turvey
Sent: 11 September 2008 21:48
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [Wikimediauk-l] U18 Directors

 

To Chris Wood - Great to know that you're keen to get involved and I agree with others that we should try to be as inclusive as possible.

With only two days to go until close of nominations, I think it's too late to change this rule - that has already been agreed by consensus - that only 18+s can be candidates for the initial board.

However, one of the first things the new Board will do is draft the rules of the chapter - its Memorandum and Article of Association - which i guess will include details of the voting system for members of the subsequent Boards - so please do input there. I personally hope we can come up with a situation which allows 16-18s to be members of the Board but also satisfies the Charities Commission. As you already mentioned, the legal restriction is that Limited Company Directors have to be 16+ but the Charities Commission also has the power to intervene if they fear "mismanagement" of the charity. I've put more details up at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK_v2.0/Candidate_FAQs#Why_do_Board_candidates_have_to_be_over_18.3F

There is nothing to prevent you from putting your name up on the list, but the election committee will probably decide to invalidate your candidacy.

While we're on that subject I presume that everyone is happy for - geni, Andrew Whitworth and Jo Seddon - to be the election committee. In that case, I'll put details up on the wiki. Also, is it the consensus that we drop the 50% rule?

As to guarantor members, I am not aware of any legal restriction on the age of members. I can't think of any reason we would want to restrict it to over 18s, but I guess this is a decision for the inital Board in consultation with the community.

Alison made an interesting point about it being a good idea if all intial Board members had lived in the same place for three years, weren't private renters, had bills in their own name, were in full time employement, had no CCJs and were UK passport holders. I wouldn't want any of these to be a requirement for someone to be a Board member and I don't think it would be fair to introduce this at this stage, but I've added it as a "voluntary question" here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK_v2.0/Candidate_questions as it might be useful for voters.

Finally, someone mentioned it wouldnt' be a problem if a person who was a potential risk to children got hold of a U16's address because it would be their parent's address. My though was, they may also be able to get their phone number, email address, IRC contact, facebook/myspace page etc etc - you'd be surprised how much information is readily available. That's the issue I think we should be careful of.

 

Andrew Turvey

 


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[hidden email]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l