[Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership

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

[Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership

Pine W
I would hope that the Board is now planning an executive transition for
WMF. I would like to ask the Board to be transparent about this, including
making timely posts to this mailing list and proactively posting documents
and timelines on Meta and Commons.

I would hope that people skills, communications skills, and cultural fit
are high on the list of priorities for the next executive.

I also hope that the current Board members will thoughtfully consider
whether it's in the best interests of the Wikimedia Foundation and the
larger Wikimedia movement for them to continue as Board members. By human
nature, people are suited to different roles, both in work and in volunteer
leadership capacities. It seems to me that Lila and at least some Board
members have interests, skills and abilities that could be beneficial in
other organizations or in different roles in the Wikimedia movement. Having
the courage to change is far from the end of the world; Arrnon did it, a
number of staff members are doing it, and I hope that Lila and at least
some Board members will follow their example so that in the long run
everyone will be in places that are good for them.

Also in the long run I hope that the Wikimedia Foundation and our volunteer
community will emerge strong, resilient, healthy, and vibrant.

Pine
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership

Marc-Andre
On 16-02-22 02:08 PM, Pine W wrote:
> Also in the long run I hope that the Wikimedia Foundation and our volunteer
> community will emerge strong, resilient, healthy, and vibrant.

I've not always agreed with you, Pine.  Not often, in fact.

But in this I think you will find broad agreement and a strong rallying cry.

I think staff and volunteers will always be a little at odd with each
other - even as they are part of each other.  I wore both hats, in a way
even before I was staff - and will always be a little of both even when
not employed by the WMF.  But, in the end, we're just working different
tacks to the same heading.

Regardless of how this resolves - and it /will/ resolve - the movement
will perdure and we'll forge on because we all share that vision.

-- Marc


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership

Dariusz Jemielniak-3
In reply to this post by Pine W
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I also hope that the current Board members will thoughtfully consider
> whether it's in the best interests of the Wikimedia Foundation and the
> larger Wikimedia movement for them to continue as Board members.


I can only speak for myself here, but I'm really not tied to my position :)
If there is a clear signal from the wider community that I should step
down, I will. I'm not sure how this should work (obviously, there should be
some practical balance between a valid concern of a community at large, and
just a couple of people seeking disruption - which I'm not saying is the
case here, just thinking about not creating a precedence), but all in all,
the voice of the community should be heard, and especially in the case of
community-elected seats - treated with utmost respect.

I believe that the community (including our staff) is the source of our
competitive advantage. Not tech (great as it may be), not content (great as
it is, but free to take). If this very community decides that I have failed
in my role, or even that I have not, but there is a common perception that
my continued tenure will not advance the movement, that's the way to go.

I don't think it would be wise to have a total simultaneous Board step-down
though - at least a situation of zero continuity is dangerous.

dj
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership

Pete Forsyth-2
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I also hope that the current Board members will thoughtfully consider
> > whether it's in the best interests of the Wikimedia Foundation and the
> > larger Wikimedia movement for them to continue as Board members.
>
>
> I can only speak for myself here, but I'm really not tied to my position :)
> If there is a clear signal from the wider community that I should step
> down, I will. I'm not sure how this should work (obviously, there should be
> some practical balance between a valid concern of a community at large, and
> just a couple of people seeking disruption - which I'm not saying is the
> case here, just thinking about not creating a precedence),


Dariusz,

I think any steps that can be taken preemptively -- that is, steps that
avoid the need for broad community deliberation about who should step down
and who shouldn't -- would be most welcome. It seems rather clear to me
that whatever Trustees led the charge on the actions that have caused
strife are the ones whose departure would be the most beneficial. I suppose
I, like others, have some opinions about who those Trustees might be, but I
very much hope we are all spared the need to share our speculations
(especially because those of us outside the Board have very limited
information about its internal workings).

I believe that the community (including our staff) is the source of our
> competitive advantage. Not tech (great as it may be), not content (great as
> it is, but free to take). If this very community decides that I have failed
> in my role, or even that I have not, but there is a common perception that
> my continued tenure will not advance the movement, that's the way to go.
>

Thank you for articulating this principle. I won't comment on specific
Trustees here, but I do think that genuine participation (demonstrating
good listening, in addition to sharing views) in public forums is a great
asset in a Trustee, and some have exhibited that quality better than others.

I don't think it would be wise to have a total simultaneous Board step-down
> though - at least a situation of zero continuity is dangerous.


I agree that this is not a step to be taken lightly, and may not be needed
here. But given the extent of current problems, I wouldn't rule it out
entirely. It would of course have to be accompanied by a *very* strong
plan, *very* well vetted and communicated, for next steps. It is possible,
for instance, for current board members to continue to serve the movement
by sharing their knowledge (privately and/or publicly), without necessarily
having the authority of a voting position.

One thing that I hope is under careful consideration is the value of a seat
reserved for an individual (whether enshrined in the Bylaws or in
tradition). If Jimmy Wales were to stand for election, I am confident he
would win; but I think that method of getting on the board would be better
than Founder's Seat as an institution (as long as it doesn't come at the
expense of an existing community seat).

-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership

George William Herbert
In reply to this post by Dariusz Jemielniak-3

I don't want to suggest the Board resign en masse today or anything like that; that would be overly catastrophic and dramatic, make recovering harder, hurt the people involved all around worse, etc.

I think we are getting more about what happened from Board perspectives.  That is very much appreciated.

The fixes will require why and how it happened.
 
If the answers to those indicate that the board's job description and skills needs changed, or other issues then you need to fix those either with training and growth or with new members.

You (we all) need to understand what the board's requirements and capabilities need to be.  Don't randomly change membership without knowing what is needed and whether new Trustees help solve that.

If you individually don't see yourself able to match those needs after they are articulated, I hope the Board members do the right thing for the movement and replace themselves with people who do.

Thank you.


George William Herbert
Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 22, 2016, at 11:31 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I also hope that the current Board members will thoughtfully consider
>> whether it's in the best interests of the Wikimedia Foundation and the
>> larger Wikimedia movement for them to continue as Board members.
>
>
> I can only speak for myself here, but I'm really not tied to my position :)
> If there is a clear signal from the wider community that I should step
> down, I will. I'm not sure how this should work (obviously, there should be
> some practical balance between a valid concern of a community at large, and
> just a couple of people seeking disruption - which I'm not saying is the
> case here, just thinking about not creating a precedence), but all in all,
> the voice of the community should be heard, and especially in the case of
> community-elected seats - treated with utmost respect.
>
> I believe that the community (including our staff) is the source of our
> competitive advantage. Not tech (great as it may be), not content (great as
> it is, but free to take). If this very community decides that I have failed
> in my role, or even that I have not, but there is a common perception that
> my continued tenure will not advance the movement, that's the way to go.
>
> I don't think it would be wise to have a total simultaneous Board step-down
> though - at least a situation of zero continuity is dangerous.
>
> dj
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership

Ryan Lane-2
In reply to this post by Pine W
Pine W <wiki.pine@...> writes:

>
> I would hope that the Board is now planning an executive transition for
> WMF. I would like to ask the Board to be transparent about this, including
> making timely posts to this mailing list and proactively posting documents
> and timelines on Meta and Commons.
>

+1. Numerous staff members have publicly asked the the ED to step down or be
removed. The situation at this point is obviously unsalvageable. Even if
things were to magically turn around tomorrow and start going in the right
direction, this series of threads would be the new seeds of discontent. Even
if everyone says they'll forgive and forget, no one really forgets who
called for them to be fired.

It shouldn't take a public staff revolt for an ED to be removed from the
board. It shouldn't have lasted past the internal staff revolt months ago.
The only way to start healing the org is to start moving forward.

- Ryan


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership

Sydney Poore
In reply to this post by Pine W
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
> I also hope that the current Board members will thoughtfully consider
> whether it's in the best interests of the Wikimedia Foundation and the
> larger Wikimedia movement for them to continue as Board members.

The instability that would result from large scale resignations of
Board members would be devastating to WMF.

That aside, under the best of circumstances, the volunteer BoT of WMF
are faced with an extremely demanding and challenging work load. And,
no volunteer board has the skill set to manage the problems that have
come up over the last few months and have escalated out of control.

I strongly encourage giving the BoT time to react to the most recent
comments, and develop a responsible plan of action.

Sydney
User:FloNight

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership

Adrian Raddatz
I absolutely agree with Sydney. Clearly something should be done, but it
doesn't need to happen right away - the servers will still be on for the
time being. Better to make an eventual informed decision than rush into
something right now, and potentially regret the consequences afterwards.

Adrian Raddatz

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 8:00 PM, Sydney Poore <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> > I also hope that the current Board members will thoughtfully consider
> > whether it's in the best interests of the Wikimedia Foundation and the
> > larger Wikimedia movement for them to continue as Board members.
>
> The instability that would result from large scale resignations of
> Board members would be devastating to WMF.
>
> That aside, under the best of circumstances, the volunteer BoT of WMF
> are faced with an extremely demanding and challenging work load. And,
> no volunteer board has the skill set to manage the problems that have
> come up over the last few months and have escalated out of control.
>
> I strongly encourage giving the BoT time to react to the most recent
> comments, and develop a responsible plan of action.
>
> Sydney
> User:FloNight
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership

Risker
In reply to this post by Sydney Poore
On 22 February 2016 at 22:00, Sydney Poore <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> > I also hope that the current Board members will thoughtfully consider
> > whether it's in the best interests of the Wikimedia Foundation and the
> > larger Wikimedia movement for them to continue as Board members.
>
> The instability that would result from large scale resignations of
> Board members would be devastating to WMF.
>
> That aside, under the best of circumstances, the volunteer BoT of WMF
> are faced with an extremely demanding and challenging work load. And,
> no volunteer board has the skill set to manage the problems that have
> come up over the last few months and have escalated out of control.
>
> I strongly encourage giving the BoT time to react to the most recent
> comments, and develop a responsible plan of action.
>
>

I also agree with Sydney, and will point out that in the past year, we have
had brand new board members in 3 board-selected seats (one of whom only
participated for a few weeks), and 3 community seats (two of whom remain in
place, the third being replaced by a former board member.  That is at least
five new members in a single year, no matter how one cuts it - and it
doesn't even take into consideration the ongoing process for
chapter-selected seats.

This past year has already seen the largest turnover in board membership
that the Foundation has ever experienced; it was unusual to have more than
two seats change incumbents in all the past years. We have already seen
very significant change in the make-up of the Board, and half the board is
still learning the ropes and responsibilities. This level of change is
likely to be at least partly responsible for some of the unfortunate
situations we have seen in the last several months. But those who are
seeking a new board...well, you already have one.

Risker/Anne
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership

Thyge
It is in cases like this that an advisory board could/should be an asset. I
hope the board could reach out to one or more participants in that
group for additional help and advice.

Regards,
Thyge


2016-02-23 5:41 GMT+01:00 Risker <[hidden email]>:

> On 22 February 2016 at 22:00, Sydney Poore <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>
> > > I also hope that the current Board members will thoughtfully consider
> > > whether it's in the best interests of the Wikimedia Foundation and the
> > > larger Wikimedia movement for them to continue as Board members.
> >
> > The instability that would result from large scale resignations of
> > Board members would be devastating to WMF.
> >
> > That aside, under the best of circumstances, the volunteer BoT of WMF
> > are faced with an extremely demanding and challenging work load. And,
> > no volunteer board has the skill set to manage the problems that have
> > come up over the last few months and have escalated out of control.
> >
> > I strongly encourage giving the BoT time to react to the most recent
> > comments, and develop a responsible plan of action.
> >
> >
>
> I also agree with Sydney, and will point out that in the past year, we have
> had brand new board members in 3 board-selected seats (one of whom only
> participated for a few weeks), and 3 community seats (two of whom remain in
> place, the third being replaced by a former board member.  That is at least
> five new members in a single year, no matter how one cuts it - and it
> doesn't even take into consideration the ongoing process for
> chapter-selected seats.
>
> This past year has already seen the largest turnover in board membership
> that the Foundation has ever experienced; it was unusual to have more than
> two seats change incumbents in all the past years. We have already seen
> very significant change in the make-up of the Board, and half the board is
> still learning the ropes and responsibilities. This level of change is
> likely to be at least partly responsible for some of the unfortunate
> situations we have seen in the last several months. But those who are
> seeking a new board...well, you already have one.
>
> Risker/Anne
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership

Florence Devouard-6
In reply to this post by Sydney Poore
Le 23/02/16 04:00, Sydney Poore a écrit :

> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>> I also hope that the current Board members will thoughtfully consider
>> whether it's in the best interests of the Wikimedia Foundation and the
>> larger Wikimedia movement for them to continue as Board members.
>
> The instability that would result from large scale resignations of
> Board members would be devastating to WMF.
>
> That aside, under the best of circumstances, the volunteer BoT of WMF
> are faced with an extremely demanding and challenging work load. And,
> no volunteer board has the skill set to manage the problems that have
> come up over the last few months and have escalated out of control.
>
> I strongly encourage giving the BoT time to react to the most recent
> comments, and develop a responsible plan of action.
>
> Sydney
> User:FloNight


+1.

Most of the board is actually rather new. Plus two members will possibly
(probably) change next summer. So asking for resignation is absolutely
not the right thing to do at the moment. We need the current members to
stick here. We need stability.

I will openly say that I am completely disappointed by the lack of
(official) communication from the board in the past couple of weeks (or
months). I thank Dariusz very much for maintaining a line of contact here.

But otherwise... I'd say we need to let the board do its job.

And we should rather reflect on how we can HELP them do that.

I think it is helpful for the board that the community AND the staff
give their frank opinion about what is going on so as to help them see
clear.

I think Molly timeline might be helpful for the board to get a better
grip of the important keypoints and opinions.

I think providing private insights to the board if relevant might be
helpful.

I think dropping them a private email to ask them if they are ok and
giving them a bit of wikilove might be helpful.

And probably other things.

Anthere


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership

Pine W
I appreciate the many constructive comments in this thread. I wish that we
knew
that the Board was having similar discussions, and that these discussions
were transparent.

> I don't think it would be wise to have a total simultaneous Board
step-down
> though - at least a situation of zero continuity is dangerous.

Agreed. My choice of the term "transition plans" was carefully considered.
I agree with several of the comments made above in this thread regarding
the Board and options for an orderly Board transition in the next several
months. Perhaps some of those transitions will involve replacing some of
the newer board members with former board members who have valuable
experience and who have demonstrated knowledge with how we work
in WMF and the Wikimedia community to create positive change.

To clarify some thoughts about Lila:

For the record, I think I too may have had a part in the selection of Lila
for ED.
I advocated for someone with private sector performance-management
perspective to be brought into WMF. At the time I didn't appreciate that
this
might create a culture clash with our values and practices regarding
transparency, communications, and community participation. I feel like I
share part of the blame for my advocacy at the time, which in hindsight
should have been more carefully nuanced.

Based on nonpublic communications, I believe that Lila generally has good
intentions, and I would like her to feel good about things that have gone
well while she has been here. For example, the community consultation
regarding PC&L, and also the plans for re-imagining grants. We are also
seeing some exciting developments in Analytics and revision scoring,
the "big English" fundraiser in late 2015 went well, and there seems
to be strong community support for WMF taking legal and technical
steps to protect our editors and readers from mass surveillance.

I have heard allegations that some of the information about the Knight
grant as presented to the public were intentionally deceptive.
I have *not* seen evidence, in public or private, that yet convinces me
that there was any intent to deceive. On the other hand, communications,
planning, and transparency regarding the Knight grant were deeply
problematic, to the point where WMF Board members and staff seemed to
be confused and were themselves uncertain about what the right
answers were.

Going forward, I believe that the staff of WMF and the larger Wikimedia
community would be best served with new leadership in the executive
director role. The retention of skilled staff, the relations with donors
such
as Knight, and the handling of strategic, financial, and product planning
in an orderly and transparent manner are all important roles for the ED.

I hope that Lila and the Board will ponder the points raised in this thread
and many others, as well as the information in this *Signpost *commentary
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2016-02-17/Special_report>
and in http://mollywhite.net/wikimedia-timeline/. It seems to me that the
leadership at WMF simply must change, and that Lila and the Board would
act in the best interest of WMF by making transition plans.

Pine
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership

cro0016
I don't really know Lila at all, and I've not been paying an awful lot of attention to all of this until recently, when my former manager Siko Bouterse resigned. This act alone, plus her email rang alarm bells that things with the WMF aren't going great. The subsequent resignation of others (including today, Oliver Keyes, whom I also have much respect for) is quite concerning. I worked for WMF for 6 months as a Community Fellow back in 2012, and for a long period of time always wanted to work there again. It felt like a great place to work. While I recently applied for a role and was unsuccessful, recent events have made me feel that cannot maybe I dodged a bullet.

Lila's current position cannot one that anyone wants to be in. I am reminded of the recent appointment and subsequent resignation of Arnon Geshuri, where one way or another, he realised that all the discussion around him was a distraction for the community. It's not my place to say (or really, anyone's except the BoT) but I would hope that Lila would consider whether it is really in the best interests of the Wikimedia Foundation, and the community in general to stay on as the ED, given the loss of significant key staff, for a multitude of reasons, and the significant distraction and "drama" this has caused. I would respectfully suggest that it might be time to step aside.

Best,

Steven Crossin (formerly Steven Zhang)
Sent from my iPhone

> On 24 Feb 2016, at 3:41 PM, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I appreciate the many constructive comments in this thread. I wish that we
> knew
> that the Board was having similar discussions, and that these discussions
> were transparent.
>
>> I don't think it would be wise to have a total simultaneous Board
> step-down
>> though - at least a situation of zero continuity is dangerous.
>
> Agreed. My choice of the term "transition plans" was carefully considered.
> I agree with several of the comments made above in this thread regarding
> the Board and options for an orderly Board transition in the next several
> months. Perhaps some of those transitions will involve replacing some of
> the newer board members with former board members who have valuable
> experience and who have demonstrated knowledge with how we work
> in WMF and the Wikimedia community to create positive change.
>
> To clarify some thoughts about Lila:
>
> For the record, I think I too may have had a part in the selection of Lila
> for ED.
> I advocated for someone with private sector performance-management
> perspective to be brought into WMF. At the time I didn't appreciate that
> this
> might create a culture clash with our values and practices regarding
> transparency, communications, and community participation. I feel like I
> share part of the blame for my advocacy at the time, which in hindsight
> should have been more carefully nuanced.
>
> Based on nonpublic communications, I believe that Lila generally has good
> intentions, and I would like her to feel good about things that have gone
> well while she has been here. For example, the community consultation
> regarding PC&L, and also the plans for re-imagining grants. We are also
> seeing some exciting developments in Analytics and revision scoring,
> the "big English" fundraiser in late 2015 went well, and there seems
> to be strong community support for WMF taking legal and technical
> steps to protect our editors and readers from mass surveillance.
>
> I have heard allegations that some of the information about the Knight
> grant as presented to the public were intentionally deceptive.
> I have *not* seen evidence, in public or private, that yet convinces me
> that there was any intent to deceive. On the other hand, communications,
> planning, and transparency regarding the Knight grant were deeply
> problematic, to the point where WMF Board members and staff seemed to
> be confused and were themselves uncertain about what the right
> answers were.
>
> Going forward, I believe that the staff of WMF and the larger Wikimedia
> community would be best served with new leadership in the executive
> director role. The retention of skilled staff, the relations with donors
> such
> as Knight, and the handling of strategic, financial, and product planning
> in an orderly and transparent manner are all important roles for the ED.
>
> I hope that Lila and the Board will ponder the points raised in this thread
> and many others, as well as the information in this *Signpost *commentary
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2016-02-17/Special_report>
> and in http://mollywhite.net/wikimedia-timeline/. It seems to me that the
> leadership at WMF simply must change, and that Lila and the Board would
> act in the best interest of WMF by making transition plans.
>
> Pine
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>