User talk:Jon Cates

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Please feel free to ask any questions about my candidacy. --Jon Cates 03:20, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have attempted to translate questions into French ... Click here!
J'ai essayé de traduire des questions en Français ... Cliquez ici!


What do you think of the relationship ? Do you see the relation as a federation type or a branch type ? (without or with legal ties). Do you think that chapters should have an authorization to use brand name and logo for deals (such as a DVD publishing) or should the Foundation handle this from a legal perspective ? What is your position in term of membership (should the Foundation have members or not ?). Anthere

PS: would you mind discussing these topics on meta with all editors rather than on the english wikipedia only ?

Thank you for your questions. As to the relationship between the Foundation and the Chapters, I feel that many organizations operate in similar fashion and have developed strong relationships. For instance, one organization of which I am a member has an international board, and numerous regional/continental boards which are independent yet apart of the greater whole. This mechanism allows for greater innovation and development, of which I am an ardent support. As to the use of branding (such as name, logo and the like), it is my belief that the chapters must discuss this with the Foundation and receive the appropriate and legally binding licensing for their use. If a chapter produces a DVD of the projects work, there must be Foundation oversight to a degree, as it reflects on the Foundation and the whole of Wikidom. It is my belief that the Foundation must be kept up-to-date on such occurances. I hope this answers your questions. -- Jon Cates
As to your question on members, I would need to see the method of membership being proposed. Member has many conotations, and I am not prepared at this time to make a statement without a clear definition, including duties and responsiblities, role of 'member' and the like. --Jon Cates 18:07, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding policy of the board[edit]

Hi Jon,

On your candidacy statement I see little explanation what your ideas are for the way the board should or shouldn't work. I see how you think on how wikipedia should work, but later you tell that you think boardmembers are too project-focused. Can you explain that maybe a little more? And can you for instance say what you think about the democraticy of the board, should it have more boardmembers added from the community, what do you think about the function of executive director? What do you think the foundation should focus on in the future? I hope you have some answers :) Effeietsanders 13:55, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for these questions.
    • I would first like to address your question as to the number of boardmembers. I do believe that there should be an increase in the number of boardmembers. It is my opinion that a small board may have worked best in the past, but with the growth of the WikiSphere an in as much the growth of issues which the Board will face, it is important to have a reasonable selection of persons to address the issues on the Board. I believe that the board should be increased by two members, from the community, and following six months a review of the progress should be conducted. If the increase is a positive factor, the board should review the possibility of increasing the board. If the result is negative, those additional seats should be removed following their term of service.
    • As for the Executive Director, I am in the cadre of those who consider the Executive Director a chief operating officer. They have the ability and power to direct the daily operations of the organization, within the confines of Board bylaws, resolutions, and directives. If there is no policy to direct an Executive Director in a matter, they should have the ability to institute temporary measures with the knowledge and approval of at least two board members, until the full board can decide the matter.
    • The first thing I would like to see the Board focus on is the development of a Strategic Plan. Where should the Board be in 6 mos., 1 year, 5 years, 10 years? Where should the Foundation be in 6 mos., 1 year, 5 years, 10 years? Where should the projects be in 6 mos., 1 year, 5 years, 10 years?
    • As to you tell that you think boardmembers are too project-focused ... I believe my wording was Having served on the Boards of many organizations, it is clear that many times Board members can be project-centric. This was not directed at the current Board, but my observation of Boards in general. If it was taken otherwise, I apologize.
--Jon Cates 05:23, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]