--- "Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales"
<jwales(a)wikia.com> wrote:
Mark Williamson wrote:
So, you think it's good that the majority of
the board members
were
not voted in but rather chosen silently by Jimbo?
I said "more
complete democracy", not "completely direct democracy".
I think it was very good. Transition in a responsible manner takes
time.
Angela and Anthere are unbelievably good as board members, and we
have
a casual agreement between us that if the two of them ever vote in
one
direction, I will defer to them, so that it does not matter how Tim
and Michael vote. The only exception I would make to this is if
they
wanted something that I felt endangered us in some very extreme way
--
but this is basically impossible because they are so good at what
they
do.
Is the re-election campain on already? ;)
I agree as well. I think Angela and Anthere are doing an amazing job.
(See, the British and the French _can_ work with each other)
Since most people don't know how Tim and Michael think, I wouldn't be
surprised if they too would have the Wikipedia's best interest at
heart when voting. I am not worried about the Jimbo+2 bloc.
Finally, on moving slow; an old Italian proverb goes something like
this: "He who travels slowest travels safest."
Ah, a second compliment, this is really a good day :-) Merci Christopher.
I think that what is especially empowering is the leadership type of
Jimbo. Jimbo is not coaching at all, and rather little directing (though
hints are sometimes quite clear), as well as rather little delegating (I
think the foundation would sometimes benefit from more delegation from
Jimbo). His type is essentially supportive. Very low direction but very
high support. This leaves basically as much opportunity to work in
certain directions as one would dream of.
However, one moves in a direction supported by Jimbo much more quickly
than in a direction not supported by Jimbo. I can take a long time to
find a satisfactory decision, but prevents from travelling in an unsafe
direction.