Jump to content

Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees/Call for feedback: Community Board seats/Reports/2021-02-25 Feedback from ESEAP Community Volunteers

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

2021-02-25 Feedback from ESEAP Community Volunteers[edit]

Number of Participants :3
Participants responded to a survey regarding the Call for Feedback for Community Board Seats
Two participants are volunteer editors from the Philippines
One participant is a member of Wikimedia Malaysia User Group
General feedback[edit]
  • At first, two participants from the Philippines appreciated being valued by the Board Governance when called for feedback.
  • One person from Malaysia expressed his gratitude for even considering small community voices
Ideas discussed[edit]
  • Two respondents from Malaysia and the Philippines supported the idea although he not sure about this "quotas" thing. Yes it will be good if most representatives are from small communities. But to appoint one from such a large number of small communities will be so tedious. And yes we need to find a way to represent all those small communities.
  • One participant thinks quotas can be a measurement of the depth of the affiliations.He think this is a good way to represent the diversity of the community. Provided that the membership is also open to the diverse members of the community.
Vetting of Candidates
  • According to the respondent from Malaysia, don't expect all candidates to know what they will be doing on the Board. Make sure they know basic and intermediate editing across all projects; and have a class or tutor session about administration or governance in the Trusteeship.
  • One respondent from the Philippines don't expect all candidates know what they will be doing in the Board. Make sure they know basic and intermediate editing across all projects; and have a class or tutor session about administration in the Trustee.;Idea3
  • The person from the Philippines think this is a good idea. The community should take part in the selection process to avoid conflict of interests and also to ensure a clean and fair election.
Direct appointment of Candidate
  • The respondent from Malaysia said if that is your choice of method and if the community already agreed for that certain candidate, now it is all the Board's decision to appoint them as they wish via Board direct appointment. So take the community approval as community voice for the candidates, but for internal matters, the Board will decide.
  • Participants agree not to discuss this idea as they need further understanding of it.
  • Yes, if the candidate is qualified then we should give them a chance.
  • The person from the Philippines said that the Selection Committee can endorse an appointment. However, the community should limit the Board from appointing candidates not selected by the Selection Committee.
Regional Seats
  • The member of Wikimedia Malaysia said it is good to have Regional Seats. This is long overdue. But make sure that they are not biased to the group they primarily represent. Board seats coming from the regions need to listen to what small communities want as their projects and help them grow.
  • Another opinion from the Philippines is that appointing regional seats may also bridge the gap between underrepresented communities. However, clear goals and objectives should always be present.
Specialization Seats
  • The volunteer from Malaysia said the movement need this seat, a Trustee that specializes in helping small communities grow by guiding them in their projects, mentoring and growth hacking the community to maturity so they can be at par with other affiliates which will make the Foundation and the movement stronger than ever.
  • One Filipino volunteer and editor said it not necessary but if specific reason is offered, one or two specialization seats is good.
Action required[edit]
For the community
  • Share the Call for Feedback to their communities
For the facilitator
  • Follow up on the other survey responses from the community


  • A further clarification on the respondents' feedback about the direct appointment of candidates stated that from a Wikimedia Malaysia User Group volunteer clarified that if this is a popular choice, he will support it. The Board knows the best candidate it would need based on the selection committee’s submitted list of candidates and so since it is an indirect election, it should be implemented with utmost transparency.
  • Another Filipino community volunteer clarified that although direct appointment is almost similar to indirect elections, there should be a limit on the direct appointments done by the Board. The selection committee should also just submit candidates that could be an asset to the Board of Trustees.