[Foundation-l] Breaking promises (was Re: Where we are headed)

Mon Jun 5 04:36:13 UTC 2006

On 6/4/06, Troy Hunter <troyhunter0 at lycos.com> wrote:
> There was indeed some ambiguity in the phrasing of the statement in the Wikimedia Quarto, as to whether abstention is a loophole. However the second statement I quoted, which was directly from Jimbo, had no such ambiguity, to my reading. I'll quote it again since you've snipped it.
>
> "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."
>
> Abstention is clearly not a way to make it "so that it does not matter how Tim and Michael vote". Jimbo promises to defer to Angela and Anthere's judgement, not to the judgement of all 4 remaining Board members. An abstention does the latter, not the former.
>
> Are you saying that while "deferring to the judgement of Angela and Anthere", the three unelected Board members nevertheless reserve the right to veto any of their proposals? In what way is that deferring?

I didn't snip it thinking it was relevant, because I see no
substantial difference between the two quotes.  Should the two object
to any proposal, it's certainly the case that a simple absention will
result in the failure of a motion.  This is what checks and balances
are all about.

By the same token, any motion—which by its very nature changes the way
in which the Foundation is run—must meet a very high standard, for the
sake of "community transparency," and you can't expect someone to
actively change his vote based on what other people may or may not
think.  We don't look upon Jimmy as our supreme dictator, but neither
do we expect him to be a simple puppet.  Expand the Board, yes, but
don't require the current trustees to compromise their beliefs.

Austin