board candidacies

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
60 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

jd-47
It's now live, a nice, simple system of templates which streamline
translation process. Many candidates created a Talk page on Meta for the
elections.

If you find something broken, write on my Talk page and I'll fix it.


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

signature.asc (198 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

Amgine

On 11-Aug-06, at 7:53 AM, Jean-Denis Vauguet wrote:

> It's now live, a nice, simple system of templates which streamline
> translation process. Many candidates created a Talk page on Meta  
> for the
> elections.
>
> If you find something broken, write on my Talk page and I'll fix it.


Just so everyone is aware, Jean-Denis is currently [[m:User:Meanos]],  
but has requested a user name change to [[m:User:Jd]] (to match his  
[[w:fr:User:Jd]]).

Amgine
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

Luiz Augusto-2
In reply to this post by Florence Devouard-3
My English is very very very poor to write something, but I really need to
try it here. The point ins't the expenses for boarders. The point is what is
Wiki>>>M<<<edia (and not only Wikipedia, Wikipedia is only the most famous
project) is. Please, forgive the expenses question, Wikimedia ins't a travel
agency, Wikimedia is a Foundation devoted to Free Culture movement.

Some candidates in yours presentations appear to be in that election only to
give some important position in a famous website. Wiki>>>M<<<edia is so much
more than it and the boarder position is so much more than it. Please, read
again the full message from Anthere.

P.S.: Portuguese Wikipedia (my home wiki) periodically need to ask stressing
subjects to boarders (a community with 300 editor that don't have a
ArbCom committee).
I'm doubt if at least 50% of current candidates are ready to apply to a
position that lot's of anothers wikis need to listen periodically about lots
of subjects.

On 8/10/06, Anthere <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Hello all,
>
> Being back from Wikimania, I have a look at the list of candidates and
> here is what I see:
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Election_candidates_2006
>
> I'd like to make a very serious appeal for candidates.
> I would hate to discourage some of you, but rather to be frank.
>
> Being on the board is not a game.
> It is not about changing the policies on the english wikipedia.
> It is not about improving welcome templates for newbies on wikipedia
> either.
> And it is not even about pushing the use of the german userboxes.
>
> What we need (desperately need) is people who understand what the
> Foundation is, what our needs are, where the challenges are located.
>
>
> I listed some of the challenges in my presentation at Wikimania;
> (http://wikimania2006.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proceedings:FD1). I have no
> idea when the audio will be accessible, but I think any candidate should
> at least have a look/ear to it.
>
> What would be best are people who already know and participate to
> Wikimedia Foundation issue. I could cite dozen, many of whom were at
> wikimania. A couple candidated, but I also know they are controversial
> so might end up not being in the top.
>
> I would like that non english editors take the chance to run. Not being
> english is certainly an handicap due to the huge number of english
> voters. Naturally, if you are mostly known in one community, you'll get
> a disadvantage. But if you are also a meta participant, the word can be
> disseminated that you are a high quality person. Because meta people
> know you and can tell about you in the local communities. You have a
> chance !
>
>
> I will not hide the fact that being on the board is highly frustrating.
> It is a lot of work. It costs personal money. It is little rewarded. It
> carries its generous load of humiliation.
>
> But... if you care about the projects, if you care about their future,
> if you care about giving a chance to the content to stay free for real,
> if you care about the risk of being "adopted" by a commercial firm, if
> you care about the risk of seeing the freedom being reduced to protect
> what is merely a legal entity, if you care about us being an
> international entity rather than being a pure american business and
> professional foundation, please, do help.
>
> Please.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

Florence Devouard-3
In reply to this post by Anthony DiPierro
Anthony wrote:

> On 8/10/06, Delphine Ménard <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>I sincerely hope that the international and cross project community
>>will get organized and vote on this election, so as to balance the
>>natural weight of the English Wikipedia and make sure that the person
>>elected on the board has the skills necessary to the position.Whether
>>they are or not from the English Wikipedia is indeed, irrelevant.
>>
>
> If it's irrelevant, then why is it being brought up?
>
> With only one seat up for grabs, I don't really think it matters what
> project the board member winds up spending most of his or her time on.
>
> As for whether or not they speak English, I frankly don't think it's
> possible for someone who doesn't read and write English well to be an
> effective board member - unless maybe they have the money to hire
> their own personal translator.
>
> Anthony

I agree the future board member must be able to speak english. That's an
obvious requirement.

By the point of my initial comment (But for Arno, absolutely all
discussion pages for board candidacies on the english wikipedia) is

... we have meta, as the central place to meet together. Once a
candidate publish his discussion page on a specific project, it somehow
reduce the number of questions given by participants from other
projects. It also reduces readability greatly, when the page mentionned
in the talk page of the user, where a multiplicity of questions,
relevant or not relevant to the elections also stand. It also prevents
translation. And finally, it raises the question of whether the
candidate even know what meta is.

ant

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

Florence Devouard-3
In reply to this post by daniwo59


[hidden email] wrote:
>  
> I am confused by this thread. It is starting with false assumptions (Board  
> members are required to spend their own money for things)

?

Sorry Danny, but it is not a false assumption.
I am currently required to spend my own money to go and give speeches.
This has been the case for over 2 years now. Until last december, I had
a job and it was not an issue to use my own savings. It has become an
issue. And yes, Jimbo took it lightly during the board panel when I
stupidely commented the issue. And yes, Andrew made fun of it saying
that Thomas was taking care of by yourself during Wikimania in any
cases. And yes, I felt humiliated. And yes, it is getting up to my
throat right now. Badly. Everyday a little bit more. Each time I have to
find a different way to organise myself to limit costs as much as I can,
and each time it takes hours to find the best solution. Usually illegal,
as legal is too expensive. And each time my husband talks to me angrily
because my poorly built-up solutions impair his own working time. And
each time I cut on something I could have offered to my own kids. And
each time I am more angry.

So rrrrright, so much for the false assumptions. The expenses of Board
members relating to Foundation work are not entirely covered by the
Foundation. That's not a false assumption. That's a fact.

This said, Michael wrote yesterday that I should ask for my child care
costs to be covered. Does that need a resolution ?

Ant




and builds on that to

>  create further false assumptions (we have enough dot com millionaires on the
>  Board).
>  
> To the best of my knowledge:
> 1. The expenses of Board members relating to Foundation work are covered by  
> the Foundation. They do not come from the individual Board members' "personal  
> savings."
> 2. We currently have no dot com millionaires on the Board.
> 3. Paying Board members for Board-related activities can be perceived  as a
> potential conflict of interests.
> 4. In many non-profit organizations in the US--but not the WMF--Board  
> membership is actually contingent upon making a significant donation to the  
> organization.
>  
> Please get the facts right when complaining about the Board and its  members.
>  
> Danny
>  
>  
> In a message dated 8/11/2006 1:25:49 AM Eastern Daylight Time,  
> [hidden email] writes:
>
> Walter  van Kalken:
>
>>I personally feel that one of the big issues is that  people are required
>>to spend their own money for things. This means  that if you life outside
>>of the US, even outside of Florida that your  costs will be prohibitively
>>high. I personally find that one of the  most prohibitive requirements.
>>Many people whom would have the time  and the enthousiasm do not have a
>>bankaccount for that. And that is  one of the reasons I have a lot of
>>respect for Angela and Anthere.  They are willing to spend their personal
>>savings for the betterment of  the projects. People should realize that
>>the next time they start  complaining with them.
>
>
> I concur with this entirely. We have enough dot  com millionaires on the
> Board, and the Advisory Board might add  some.
> This is not personal to anyone, those concerned probably just got  their
> priorities right.
>
> What 'saddens' me however is the way Anthere  was treated during the Board
> session last Sunday when the issue of paying  board members was brought up.
> Jimbo made a casual remark to the effect of  "(I'm not sure) we want to pay
> board members, besides it is not allowed by  the bylaws" (paraphrasing here).
> Easy to say in his position. Then someone  made a witty but badly timed joke
> about the situation, the chairman of the  Board might have intervened at that
> moment. I feel it was humiliating for  Anthere. Maybe the bylaws allow other
> board members than Jimmy to accept  well paid invitations for keynote
> speeches?
>
> Erik  Zachte

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

Jimmy Wales
Anthere wrote:
> I am currently required to spend my own money to go and give speeches.
> This has been the case for over 2 years now.
The board passed a budget for your expenses and to my knowledge, you
have never used it all up, nor have you asked
for an increase, nor have you ever submitted any claim for expenses
which has been denied.  Standard policy has always
been that board members should be reimbursed upon request for reasonable
travel expenses.

> This said, Michael wrote yesterday that I should ask for my child care
> costs to be covered. Does that need a resolution ?
>
>  
No, it just requires you to submit your request.  As always.

--Jimbo
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by erikzachte
Erik Zachte wrote:

>Walter van Kalken:
>  
>
>>I personally feel that one of the big issues is that people are required
>>to spend their own money for things. This means that if you life outside
>>of the US, even outside of Florida that your costs will be prohibitively
>>high. I personally find that one of the most prohibitive requirements.
>>Many people whom would have the time and the enthousiasm do not have a
>>bankaccount for that. And that is one of the reasons I have a lot of
>>respect for Angela and Anthere. They are willing to spend their personal
>>savings for the betterment of the projects. People should realize that
>>the next time they start complaining with them.
>>    
>>
>I concur with this entirely. We have enough dot com millionaires on the
>Board, and the Advisory Board might add some.
>This is not personal to anyone, those concerned probably just got their
>priorities right.
>
>What 'saddens' me however is the way Anthere was treated during the Board
>session last Sunday when the issue of paying board members was brought up.
>Jimbo made a casual remark to the effect of "(I'm not sure) we want to pay
>board members, besides it is not allowed by the bylaws" (paraphrasing here).
>Easy to say in his position. Then someone made a witty but badly timed joke
>about the situation, the chairman of the Board might have intervened at that
>moment. I feel it was humiliating for Anthere. Maybe the bylaws allow other
>board members than Jimmy to accept well paid invitations for keynote
>speeches?
>
I recently sat on a committee of a local unrelated organization that
dealt with the compensation issue on a much smaller scale.  There too,
one of the borderline issues had to do with babysitting.  It can be a
very tricky issue that needs to be approached with a great deal of
sensitivity.  Before answering I made a point of reviewing the
transcript
http://wikimania2006.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_Panel

There is a clear distinction between paying a salary to a board member,
and reimbursing him for out-of-pocket expenses.  The specific quote from
Jimbo is "I have no interest in being paid."  I would not extrapolate
from that comment an inference that no-one should be paid.  On the other
hand paying the airfare for key people to travel halfway around the
world is perfectly acceptable.

Anthere, IMHO, has a reputation for taking principled positions.  If she
felt that it was unethical to be reimbursed for her babysitting expenses
I need to respect that position.  I am certainly not prepared to
prejudge what would have happened if she had asked for a reimbursement
of that expense.  Very few of us need to deal with that specific
expense.  I can also look at the joke in the spirit in which it was
intended, and not as a real criticism of anybody.  Anyone there who
actually saw the tiny baby in the gentle hands of a gorilla would have
laughed.

If someone wants to generously pay a board member to give a keynote
speech that board member is entitled to keep it.  This is not a matter
for our by-laws.  I don't think that Jimbo is the only one giving
speeches, though I did think that the criticism of Brad for accepting a
speaking engagement when he "should be in the office" was somewhat petty.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

Alison M. Wheeler
On Fri, August 11, 2006 21:43, Ray Saintonge wrote:
> There is a clear distinction between paying a salary to a board member,
> and reimbursing him for out-of-pocket expenses.  The specific quote from
> Jimbo is "I have no interest in being paid."  I would not extrapolate
> from that comment an inference that no-one should be paid.  On the other
> hand paying the airfare for key people to travel halfway around the
> world is perfectly acceptable.

There is a test in the UK that the Inland Revenue (Taxation) use, which
basically tests an expenses payment as (I paraphrase) "was this cost
incurred wholly and directly as a result of an activity required by virtue
of the employment". This principle can be easily and clearly applied to
consideration of personal expenses in our situation; any costs in excess
of what the individual would have spent if they had not been carrying out
an activity on behalf od the Foundation is clearly covered.

Conversely, I would *totally* disagree with
> If someone wants to generously pay a board member to give a keynote
> speech that board member is entitled to keep it.  This is not a matter
> for our by-laws.
If someone is given a speech *because* they are from the WMF and
*representing* the WMF at that presentation, then any fees received are
the 'income' of the WMF. Obviously, the costs involved with attending the
location to give that speech (which might include travel, hotel, etc)
would be payable by the WMF. One can't have it both ways (ie get a fee
*and* claim expenses)

Alison Wheeler
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

board candidacies

erikzachte
In reply to this post by Ray Saintonge
Ray Saintonge
> I can also look at the joke in the spirit in which it was
> intended, and not as a real criticism of anybody.  Anyone there who
> actually saw the tiny baby in the gentle hands of a gorilla would have
> laughed.

Yes, I agree now on the joke being innocent by itself and, as I said
earlier, witty.

But I can relate to the fact that when one has just explained a difficult
personal situation in front of a few hundred people and a camera or two,
by the way this was after Jimmy gave his initial response, and those people
have a good laugh and then switch topic, one might feel even more alone than
when no reaction is given at all.

I would not have thought of mentioning it when anyone (me including of
course) would have followed up with a serious comment.
It was the situation rather than the joke by itself that was somewhat
embarassing.

Erik Zachte


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

Daniel Mayer
In reply to this post by Florence Devouard-3
--- Anthere <[hidden email]> wrote:
> So rrrrright, so much for the false assumptions. The expenses of Board
> members relating to Foundation work are not entirely covered by the
> Foundation. That's not a false assumption. That's a fact.

As far as I know (and I should know a thing or two about this), being reimbursed for
Wikimedia-related expenses is just a matter of requesting reimbursement and providing the
necessary documentation where needed.

If you have been denied reimbursement for Wikimedia-related expenses after submitting a
reimbursement form, then PLEASE tell me (for the form, see
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Reimbursement_request_form.xls ).

Setting up an explicit per diem policy to cover food/lodging/transit would only make such requests
easier (no need to get many small receipts).
 
> This said, Michael wrote yesterday that I should ask for my child care
> costs to be covered. Does that need a resolution ?

It seems perfectly reasonable to be reimbursed for child care obtained to cover times you are
traveling on Wikimedia-related business. I don't see why reimbursement of that expense would need
a resolution.

-- mav

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com 
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Anthony DiPierro
Anthony wrote:

>On 8/10/06, Anthony <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>
>>As for project representation, I don't think board members should be
>>representing individual projects in the first place.  Wikipedia is by
>>far the largest and most successful project, so it doesn't surprise me
>>that board candidates use that project for their discussion pages.
>>    
>>
>By the way, I also think this has a lot to do with the fact that this
>election appears to be a winner-takes-all election of a single seat
>Having representatives from different languages/projects doesn't
>make sense when there are only two elected members.
>
Of course, but for now we have to live with that and hope for better in
the by-law revisions that are yet to come

>Almost all the discussion on this very list takes place in English.  I
>don't know what percentage of people who discuss on this list
>participate primarily on Wikipedia, but I'd guess it's at least a
>simple majority.  Changing that, I believe, would require a major
>overhaul of the entire organizational structure of Wikimedia.  But I
>suppose I shouldn't make such comments without first knowing what that
>percentage really is.
>
It's not just a matter of the English language.  Angela was elected
despite the fact that she is from England.  The simple fact that 60% of
the current board is from the same country may be more significant.  
That carries with it a lot of unwanted political baggage.  Redressing
these imbalances in a way that will be fair to all concerned calls for a
lot of careful consideration that does not fit into the heat of an
election compaign.

Ec


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Walter van Kalken
Walter van Kalken wrote:

>I personally feel that one of the big issues is that people are required
>to spend their own money for things. This means that if you life outside
>of the US, even outside of Florida that your costs will be prohibitively
>high. I personally find that one of the most prohibitive requirements.
>Many people whom would have the time and the enthousiasm do not have a
>bankaccount for that. And that is one of the reasons I have a lot of
>respect for Angela and Anthere. They are willing to spend their personal
>savings for the betterment of the projects. People should realize that
>the next time they start complaining with them.
>
Being a volunteer can be costly, and many of us deal with those costs
cheerfully.  I'm sure there is a level of participation where subsidy is
warranted, but I would be hard-pressed to define that level.  Do you
think that you could put your concerns in more concrete terms.  Who
should be subsidized, and when?

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

Florence Devouard-3
In reply to this post by Alison M. Wheeler
Alison Wheeler wrote:

> On Fri, August 11, 2006 21:43, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>>There is a clear distinction between paying a salary to a board member,
>>and reimbursing him for out-of-pocket expenses.  The specific quote from
>>Jimbo is "I have no interest in being paid."  I would not extrapolate
>>from that comment an inference that no-one should be paid.  On the other
>>hand paying the airfare for key people to travel halfway around the
>>world is perfectly acceptable.
>
>
> There is a test in the UK that the Inland Revenue (Taxation) use, which
> basically tests an expenses payment as (I paraphrase) "was this cost
> incurred wholly and directly as a result of an activity required by virtue
> of the employment". This principle can be easily and clearly applied to
> consideration of personal expenses in our situation; any costs in excess
> of what the individual would have spent if they had not been carrying out
> an activity on behalf od the Foundation is clearly covered.
>
> Conversely, I would *totally* disagree with
>
>>If someone wants to generously pay a board member to give a keynote
>>speech that board member is entitled to keep it.  This is not a matter
>>for our by-laws.
>
> If someone is given a speech *because* they are from the WMF and
> *representing* the WMF at that presentation, then any fees received are
> the 'income' of the WMF. Obviously, the costs involved with attending the
> location to give that speech (which might include travel, hotel, etc)
> would be payable by the WMF. One can't have it both ways (ie get a fee
> *and* claim expenses)
>
> Alison Wheeler

Yes

BUT.

The drawline is "being from the WMF" and "representing the WMF"

It is somehow difficult to define when someone is giving speech because
he is from the WMF and representing the WMF, when this person may also
be giving the speech as the representant of another organisation (such
as Wikia for example), or when this person may also be invited to give a
speech just due to him being famous and having a good vision interesting
people.


If WMF, then WMF should pay the costs and receive the fee.
If Wikia, then Wikia should pay the costs and receive the fee possibly.
If "self", then speaker should pay the costs and speaker gets the fee.

Sometimes, it is really hard to know.

ant

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

James Hare
There could be partial reimbursements for cases like these.

On 8/11/06, Anthere <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Alison Wheeler wrote:
> > On Fri, August 11, 2006 21:43, Ray Saintonge wrote:
> >
> >>There is a clear distinction between paying a salary to a board member,
> >>and reimbursing him for out-of-pocket expenses.  The specific quote from
> >>Jimbo is "I have no interest in being paid."  I would not extrapolate
> >>from that comment an inference that no-one should be paid.  On the other
> >>hand paying the airfare for key people to travel halfway around the
> >>world is perfectly acceptable.
> >
> >
> > There is a test in the UK that the Inland Revenue (Taxation) use, which
> > basically tests an expenses payment as (I paraphrase) "was this cost
> > incurred wholly and directly as a result of an activity required by
> virtue
> > of the employment". This principle can be easily and clearly applied to
> > consideration of personal expenses in our situation; any costs in excess
> > of what the individual would have spent if they had not been carrying
> out
> > an activity on behalf od the Foundation is clearly covered.
> >
> > Conversely, I would *totally* disagree with
> >
> >>If someone wants to generously pay a board member to give a keynote
> >>speech that board member is entitled to keep it.  This is not a matter
> >>for our by-laws.
> >
> > If someone is given a speech *because* they are from the WMF and
> > *representing* the WMF at that presentation, then any fees received are
> > the 'income' of the WMF. Obviously, the costs involved with attending
> the
> > location to give that speech (which might include travel, hotel, etc)
> > would be payable by the WMF. One can't have it both ways (ie get a fee
> > *and* claim expenses)
> >
> > Alison Wheeler
>
> Yes
>
> BUT.
>
> The drawline is "being from the WMF" and "representing the WMF"
>
> It is somehow difficult to define when someone is giving speech because
> he is from the WMF and representing the WMF, when this person may also
> be giving the speech as the representant of another organisation (such
> as Wikia for example), or when this person may also be invited to give a
> speech just due to him being famous and having a good vision interesting
> people.
>
>
> If WMF, then WMF should pay the costs and receive the fee.
> If Wikia, then Wikia should pay the costs and receive the fee possibly.
> If "self", then speaker should pay the costs and speaker gets the fee.
>
> Sometimes, it is really hard to know.
>
> ant
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Anthony DiPierro
Anthony wrote:

>On 8/10/06, Delphine Ménard <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>
>>I sincerely hope that the international and cross project community
>>will get organized and vote on this election, so as to balance the
>>natural weight of the English Wikipedia and make sure that the person
>>elected on the board has the skills necessary to the position.Whether
>>they are or not from the English Wikipedia is indeed, irrelevant.
>>    
>>
>If it's irrelevant, then why is it being brought up?
>
Maybe it's just because many people do feel concerned about this.

>With only one seat up for grabs, I don't really think it matters what
>project the board member winds up spending most of his or her time on.
>
Fair enough.

>As for whether or not they speak English, I frankly don't think it's
>possible for someone who doesn't read and write English well to be an
>effective board member - unless maybe they have the money to hire
>their own personal translator.
>
Facetious eventualities aside, English has indeed been the lingua franca
at both Wikimanias, both for official proceedings and casual
conversations.  This ubiquitous practical reality does not imply any
acquiescence to the superiority of English.  A simple recognition by
native English speakers that language is not just language goes a long
way toward bridging this divide.

Ec


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Jimmy Wales
Jimmy Wales wrote:

>Erik Zachte wrote:
>  
>
>>I concur with this entirely. We have enough dot com millionaires on the
>>Board, and the Advisory Board might add some.
>>  
>>    
>>
>? We do not have any dot com millionaires on the board.
>  
>
>>What 'saddens' me however is the way Anthere was treated during the Board
>>session last Sunday when the issue of paying board members was brought up.
>>Jimbo made a casual remark to the effect of "(I'm not sure) we want to pay
>>board members, besides it is not allowed by the bylaws" (paraphrasing here).
>>    
>>
>Well, it is not allowed, not just by our bylaws as I understand it, but
>by the law.  This is not a matter of anyone treating Anthere in any bad way.
>
>She mentioned specific expenses, expenses which the foundation can and
>should reimburse.  She should request reimbursement for those.
>
We fundamentally agree here, but I would be hesitant to frame it in
terms of "The Law".  There are places where the compensation for Board
participation is an unusually high per diem for attendance at meetings.  
This can effectively circumvent the legal concept that a non-profit
organization is not there for the financial benefit of its members.

It is much more effective when policies of this kind reflect deeply held
beliefs instead of the law.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

Florence Devouard-3
In reply to this post by Jimmy Wales
Jimmy Wales wrote:

> Anthere wrote:
>
>>I am currently required to spend my own money to go and give speeches.
>>This has been the case for over 2 years now.
>
> The board passed a budget for your expenses and to my knowledge, you
> have never used it all up, nor have you asked
> for an increase, nor have you ever submitted any claim for expenses
> which has been denied.  Standard policy has always
> been that board members should be reimbursed upon request for reasonable
> travel expenses.
>
>
>>This said, Michael wrote yesterday that I should ask for my child care
>>costs to be covered. Does that need a resolution ?
>>
>>  
>
> No, it just requires you to submit your request.  As always.
>
> --Jimbo

Hmmmm. Right.
/me notes.


Just for the info (some might wonder after all), the current policy,
approved 2 years ago, is 1000 dollars per quarter for Angela and I. 3000
dollars per quarter for Jimbo.


I suggested a revision of this policy in december 2005, which may be
found on meta (it was before we moved to the private board wiki) :
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_policy:_Travel_expense_reimbursements

The new amounts suggested by Mav were removed, as they were to be
included in the budget. I am not fully sure what these were, but I think
it was 5000 for Jimbo and 3000 for other board members.

We did not make any budget in 2006 (we could never agree on one).
And this policy was never passed.
I do not know how far we exceeds (or not) the 1000 Angela/Anthere and
the 3000 Jimbo budget.

ant

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by daniwo59
[hidden email] wrote:

>I am confused by this thread. It is starting with false assumptions (Board  
>members are required to spend their own money for things) and builds on that to
> create further false assumptions (we have enough dot com millionaires on the
> Board).
>
>To the best of my knowledge:
>1. The expenses of Board members relating to Foundation work are covered by  
>the Foundation. They do not come from the individual Board members' "personal  
>savings."
>2. We currently have no dot com millionaires on the Board.
>3. Paying Board members for Board-related activities can be perceived  as a
>potential conflict of interests.
>4. In many non-profit organizations in the US--but not the WMF--Board  
>membership is actually contingent upon making a significant donation to the  
>organization.
>
>Please get the facts right when complaining about the Board and its  members.
>
Absolutely!  But the kind of false assumptions expressed by Erik are out
there, and they will continue to be out there whether any of us like it
or not.  Nevertheless, I feel more comfortable when those with the
concerns can express them openly where the situation can be peacefully
and patiently clarified ... even if it means being repetitious.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

ATR-2
In reply to this post by Florence Devouard-3
 --- Daniel Mayer <[hidden email]>  wrote:

 <...snip...>

>>--- Anthere <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> So rrrrright, so much for the false assumptions. The expenses of Board
>> members relating to Foundation work are not entirely covered by the
>> Foundation. That's not a false assumption. That's a fact.

>As far as I know (and I should know a thing or two about this), being
>reimbursed for Wikimedia-related expenses is just a matter of requesting
>reimbursement and providing the necessary documentation where needed.

>If you have been denied reimbursement for Wikimedia-related expenses after
>submitting a reimbursement form, then PLEASE tell me (for the form, see
>http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Reimbursement_request_form.xls ).

>Setting up an explicit per diem policy to cover food/lodging/transit would
>only make such requests easier (no need to get many small receipts).

>> This said, Michael wrote yesterday that I should ask for my child care
>> costs to be covered. Does that need a resolution ?

> It seems perfectly reasonable to be reimbursed for child care obtained to
> cover times you are traveling on Wikimedia-related business. I don't see
> why reimbursement of
> that expense would need a resolution.
>
>-- mav

<..snip..>

To quote from the IRS web site about Exempt Organizations (EO, WMF = EO):

"Many exempt organizations have officers who are volunteers and not paid for
their services.  These officers may receive reimbursement or an allowance
for out-of-pocket expenses.  For example, if an officer is required to
attend a convention representing the EO, the EO might pay for the trip.
Similarly, an EO may provide a monthly allowance to an officer for
automobile use."
 - http://www.irs.gov/charities/article/0,,id=131083,00.html (accessed
today)

The basic rule for NPOs is that while someone is not compensated for serving
as a director/trustee on an NPO they can be compensated for being employed
by the NPO (subject to the rules on
Intermediate Sanctions).  And for all work of officers as volunteers, such
volunteers can receive reimbursement or an allowance for expenses that can
either be  "accountable" or "unaccountable".

The important issue is that it is allowable by the organization if the
organization wishes to make such compensation, it is not mandatory under
the law.

IRS publication P535 deals with business expenses, see Chapter 13
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p535.pdf , and strangely enough in this
context Wikimedia is considered to be no different than another business in
how travel, lodging and entertainment expenses are related to the
 "business" (in the US interstate commerce includes activities of charitable
organizations this is how WMF's TM can be registered as a "mark of
commerce")
of the Wikimedia Foundation.

It would seem that babysitting expenses incurred as a cost of Anthere
attending any activity as WMF volunteer board member are "out of pocket
expenses" that _may_ be reimbursed by WMF.

Perhaps the expense should be submitted to see if the executive staff pays
it
or asks for the board's approbation before payment is made. I don't think
every board member should be required to remember every board resolution,
usually it is the staff of an NPO that has the job of submitting payment
vouchers
and dealing with day-to-day bookeeping issues such as reimbursement of
trustee/officer meeting/travel related expenses/reimbursement.

Alex T. Roshuk
Lawyer/avocat (and former NPO Executive Director/coordinateur generale)

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: board candidacies

Florence Devouard-3
In reply to this post by Ray Saintonge
Ray Saintonge wrote:
Anyone there who
> actually saw the tiny baby in the gentle hands of a gorilla would have
> laughed.

errrr.

by the way, here is a picture of one of our current candidate :
http://wikimania2006.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:IMG_5544.JPG

I like this one as well :http://www.flickr.com/photos/zuirdj/206009045/


As for
Q: Why is Angela leaving the board? She says it's become less
collaborative. How? A: (Angela) E.g., we vote on a wiki rather than
having discussions.

She has it right on spot. Before, we talked. And after, we were unable
to remember exactly what was decided and when.
Now we vote. And we are nearly unable to settle on a proposition which
makes sense to all of us precisely because it is in written format.

tough, eh :-)

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
123