[Foundation-l] Community representation

Fri Jan 11 17:05:58 UTC 2008

On Jan 11, 2008 8:32 AM, effe iets anders <effeietsanders at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think we should not be so "arrogant"  to compare ourselves with a
> whole country ;-) Maybe we should look for examples some closer to
> home. Maybe with the chapters, or other associations. Because if we
> look for this specific aspect, community is just like a general
> assemblee.
>
> I think (correct me if i am wrong) that in most associations a certain
> percentage of the members can call for a General Assemblee. And they
> can put Board elections on the agenda I think. Or maybe accept a
> resolution to dismiss a board member. And they can vote on this during
> the assemblee. It is generally not an easy procedure, but I have to
> admit there is generally a procedure.
>
> However, I think this is a Board of Trustees. And I also think that we
> should be possible to *trust* these members that they will resign if
> it is clear that a vast majority of the community is against them
> holding that position. A Volunteer Council could of course bring in
> another possibility to let someone resign. If we can't trust someone
> that (s)he will resign if asked by a vast majority, (s)he should not
> be a Trustee.
>
> Membership associations (and things like company stockholders) generally
have powers to force issues like these, but as you may remember the WMF has
no membership.  I could be wrong, but I don't believe there is any formal
process currently existing for the wiki communities to force the WMF to
consider or act on anything.  Which pretty much just leaves whining about
things.

That's not to say that the WMF couldn't adopt such a process.

Speaking of which, is there an explanation somewhere of why the WMF isn't a
membership organization?  Given that community participation is at the core
of nearly everything WMF accomplishes, it strikes me as odd that "The
Foundation does not have members" (Bylaws, Article III).

-Robert Rohde