Wikimedia Foundation elections/Board elections/2007/Candidates/Eloquence/questions

2007 board elections
Election notice FAQ Candidate presentations Endorsements Vote Results
Organization
Election committee Candidate presentation guidelines Translations Coordinators Current requests Quick translation

Hi - feel free to ask anything here. I speak English and German.--Eloquence 10:08, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Hallo! Fragen könnt ihr mir hier stellen. Ich spreche Englisch und Deutsch.--Eloquence 10:08, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Business dev., GHGs.

1. What are your thoughts on the foundation's hiring of a business developer?
2. How would you vote on the board about the foundation reducing or offsetting anthropogenic greenhouse gases, e.g. power used by hardware, flights, etc.?

Thanks. -- Jeandré, 2007-06-17t10:15z ()

Removed question about ads per User:Eloquence/Platform_2006#Scalability. -- Jeandré, 2007-06-17t10:21z

Some background: Vishal Patal had interned for the Foundation before he was hired to work for us part-time on business development and grants. Hiring him does not indicate that business development is suddenly an especially high priority; it does indicate that we (and specifically, Carolyn Doran, who supervised him in her role as COO) were happy with Vishal's work performance so far and did want to give him a longer term role in the organization.

I've been working closely with Vishal since he was hired. He is a talented and enthusiastic man who is thinking creatively about new sources of revenue for the Foundation. Business development agreements concluded so far include brand licensing agreements and data feed agreements. We have tried to shift these from fixed rate agreements to revenue sharing. I believe organizational sustainability requires multiple independent sources of revenue, and these types of deals help to establish additional ones. (The overall proportion of our revenues from these agreements may hover at 10-20% for a while.) Vishal and I have also been working on processing the backlog of grants ideas that has been largely untouched since Danny's resignation as grants coordinator, and I am trying to get Vishal to spend a reasonable amount of his time on grants and more traditional non-profit fundraising ideas. It is quite likely that we will want to hire additional professionals from these fields in the future.

As for becoming carbon neutral or more energy efficient, I think the Board should only set policy in such matters, i.e. define certain ends, and leave it up to operational staff to implement them. The policy goal of becoming as energy efficient as reasonably possible is one I can fully support, as it is also in line with simple long term financial interests. The policy goal of becoming explicitly carbon neutral using a mechanism such as offsets is more tricky; it would be good for interested community members to feed data to the Board about the actual usefulness of different programs. I would, in any case, support asking operational staff to evaluate the goal of becoming carbon neutral, without necessarily prescribing this outcome before we know for sure that it is attainable.--Eloquence 15:31, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Chapters

Currently, there are several national Wikimedia chapters. The U.S., in particular, does not have a chapter, and many other places where Wikipedia and related projects are popular do not have any organizational structure to help them collaborate on projects that are outside the scope of editing articles. What are your thoughts about the future of the chapters, and the future of regional organization of local Wikimedians? What do you think the Board can do to stimulate more out-of-wiki community participation to help us all reach the Foundation's goals? -- IlyaHaykinson 10:29, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Change

Hi Erik,

What is the top 3 things you want to have changed in the current strategy of the foundation? Thanks, Effeietsanders 10:50, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Added Value

Hi Erik,

What kind of value do you add to the current set of boardmembers (In your case only reviewing the other boardmembers, not yourself :P ) in the area of Legal, Financial, Accounting etc expertise? Thanks, Effeietsanders 10:50, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Licensing policy

You write in your statement that one of the board's accomplishments were "a project-wide, clear and consistent licensing policy". Could you please elaborate in which way this has helped Wikimedia projects and the foundation? My view may be skewed but my impression has been so far that this policy has caused a lot of headaches because it's not very clear (a lot of steps and details are missing) and it's not really consistent (it doesn't take into account the legal and cultural differences within the projects). There's been a lot of reaction to the policy and there are a lot of open questions which apparently don't really get the time of day by the board or a dedicated board member that they deserve. I don't have to drag everything out here but I'm sure you're aware of it, considering that you were a main impetus behind this policy. In the interest of the voters I would really appreciate it in which way you consider this policy clear, consistent and in the best interest of the foundation. sebmol ^? 12:52, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Checkuser policy

What is your opinion of the privacy policy, particularly relating to checkusering of adminship candidates? Majorly (talk) 13:24, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Sister Projects

What is your opinion on some of the projects that are not as well-known as Wikipedia? Would you favour a situation where attempts are made to nurture these projects rather than almost-solely concentrate on the one that has the highest profile? This question is of particular relevance to you because it is my opinion that since becoming a board member you have neglected Wikinews which you were instrumental in the setting up of, and have not answered questions given to you regarding issues around this project. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 14:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Core issues

Danny Wool in his candidate statement says: "International expansion and partnerships may be more exciting, but the role of a Board is to focus on the core issues..." . What do you make of that? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 14:58, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Communication with communities

Smaller communities in my experience can have problem drawing attention of the Board to important community issues where Board input is really necessary. Do you recognise such needs are currently left unanswered, and what could change to let the Board process such requests?--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 15:07, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Foundation Growth

The Wikimedia Foundation is growing at much faster rate now than ever before. We are trying to establish ourselves as a stable, mature, international non-profit organization. What type of organizational and management skills can you offer that will benefit the foundation?

Also, our advisory board (http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board) is filled with experienced and competent professionals. The foundation can benefit greatly from their expertise and knowledge in various fields. Currently, their involvement in the foundation seems limited, how can you change the system to utilize their expertise? Do you think the advisory board should have more influence on decision-making? Vpatel 15:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)