Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees/Call for feedback: Board of Trustees elections/Discuss Key Questions
Discussion links to each question’s discussion are below. Please discuss the questions in those sections so everyone can see what is being discussed about the question. If conversations are happening elsewhere, please list them in the conversation table below.
Community members are encouraged to add proposed solutions to the questions. Please discuss solutions for a short time first and then propose the solutions and link them below each question. This way other community members may collaborate on the proposed solutions.
Questions[edit]
- What is the best way to ensure more diverse representation among elected candidates? (Discuss this question)
 | The Board of Trustees noted the importance of selecting candidates who represent the full diversity of the Wikimedia movement. The current processes have favored volunteers from North America and Europe. |
Proposals related to this question
- Add your proposal here
- Establish a Global Council composed of members elected by regional districts
- Organise this year's affiliate selection by geographic area/constituency.
- Re-define the issue as "diversity of opinion" and not "geographic diversity".
- The Wikimedia Foundation should fund an independent Wikimedia Community Election Committee
- What are the expectations for the candidates during the election? (Discuss this question)
| Board candidates have traditionally completed applications and answered community questions. How can an election provide appropriate insight into candidates while also appreciating candidates’ status as volunteers? |
Proposals related to this question
- Add your proposal here
- How should affiliates participate in the elections? (Discuss this question)
| Two seats of the Board of Trustees due to be filled this year were filled in 2019 through the Affiliate-selected Board seats process. A change in the Bylaws removed the distinction between community and affiliate seats. How should affiliates be involved in the selection of new seats? |
Proposals related to this question
- Add your proposal here
- Have a process determined by affiliates collectively. There is no good reason to exclude affiliates for two main reasons. Firstly, we have a significant decentralisation (regions, hubs) movement which affects mainly affiliates but almost not online communities. Secondly, affiliates were involved in the MCDC election just a few months ago, affiliates is almost the only one without strong English Wikipedia domination, thus removing this group would be disappointing diversity-wise. I think asking affiliates to come up with the (s)election process is the most sensible way to move forward — NickK (talk) 22:59, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Other proposals[edit]
List of discussions[edit]
This is a list of past, present, and proposed conversations organized in the context of the Call for feedback: Board of Trustees election. If you are organizing a conversation, please list it on this table.
| Date | Project name | Discussion link | Facilitator | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| On-going | Meta-Wiki | Discuss the key questions | Movement Strategy and Governance team | Post in any language |