Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees/Call for feedback: Communitysitze im Board/Wahl aus bestätigten Kandidaturen

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Other languages:
Deutsch • ‎English • ‎español • ‎français • ‎italiano • ‎русский • ‎العربية


Call for feedback: Communitysitze im Board
Hauptseite
Möglichkeiten der Teilnahme
Vorschläge des Boards
Vorschläge der Community
Gesprächsrunden
Berichte
Zeitleiste

Das Board begreift eine Abstimmung durch die Communitys als wichtigen Teil des Auswahlverfahrens von Boardmitgliedern. Das Board beabsichtigt nicht, ein neues Verfahren zur Besetzung der durch Communitys und affiliates ausgewählten Sitze im Board zu implementieren, das kein Abstimmungsverfahren der Community enthält.

Ihr seid eingeladen uns eure Gründe mitzuteilen, weshalb eine Abstimmung der Community über die Kandidaturen für euch wichtig ist. Zum Beispiel: wie würde sich eine Abstimmung über zuvor bestätigte Kandidierende vergleichen lassen im Verhältnis zu der direkten Bestellung bestätigter Kandidaten? Eure Gründe, die zur Bevorzugung einer Abstimmung führen, helfen dem Board solche Wahlverfahren im Auswahlprozess der Boardmitglieder zu verankern.

Zusammenfassung der bisherigen Rückmeldungen

Das Facilitation Team aktualisiert diesen Abschnitt regelmäßig und ergänzt sie um Informationen aus dem Abschlussbericht.

Direct elections have received considerably more support than an indirect system mediated through a selection committee. The exceptional cases of volunteers preferring an indirect system have been documented in the “Selection committee” section above.

  • Most participants expressed their preference for Board elections when discussing related ideas like quotas, the vetting of candidates or the selection committee. Even when these ideas would be introduced, they expected elections to remain.
  • Wikimedia CH (Switzerland) emphasized the importance of a direct community vote.
  • At a European community conversation, one person said that community votes are important as they can readjust approaches of the Board and its inner circle, creating new topics and enforcing different points of view.
    • Another participant said that democracy is a better working principle than any elitist approach.
    • Another participant added that broad elections are safer, as they allow different and critical perspectives to enter the Board.
  • The ED of an European affiliate welcomed any combination of ideas preserving the direct involvement of the communities with a process ensuring skills and diversity.
    • She said that enforcing skills and diversity should not lead to a loss of involvement of the community in selection processes.
    • To her knowledge, this view was shared by a vast majority of the "Roles & Responsibilities" Movement Strategy working group.
  • The ED of another European affiliate said that community involvement is important due to shared ownership in the movement.
  • A member of Wikimedia Norway said that a lot of work within the movement is done by volunteers, so they should be a major part of the selection process, as decisions influence their work a lot.
  • Some participants said that Board elections were essential, and expressed their preference to convert some or all directly appointed seats into elected seats.