Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Special/2007-06



An interview with the candidates
 * By Ral315, 25 June, 2007

These interviews are also available in the following languages: French, German, Italian, Portuguese, and Spanish.

Ausir
Ausir has not responded to the questions yet.

Danny
Danny has not responded to the questions yet.

DragonFire1024
Candidate statement:

I am heavily involved with en.Wikinews and also an Administrator. I have published nearly 450 articles on en.Wikinews since I joined in January of 2006. I have also written several interviews exclusive to Wikinews and have also been one of the developers for Wikinews Video 2.0 and Wikinews Weather (BETA). I created 2 promotional videos for wikinews and was the person to first organize and start Wikinews Weather (again after more than 2 1/2 years), to which is updated and maintained by me and another user. I hope to get many users on various Wikis involved in the broadcast and recording of Wikinews Video and Wikinews Weather.

My biggest Wiki-wide goal is an attempt for users on various project to work together on certain issues and ideas and to help in developing new ways in gathering information and more efficient ways of delivering that information to the world.

I believe all Wikimedia projects should get the same attention when decisions regarding policies/finance/etc are made and that those polices should conform to the needs and goals of each project whenever possible. I also believe that the community of each project should be more involved in Board decisions that would drastically change the operation of their project(s).

What current or former user rights or positions do you have, and on which projects?

English Wikinews Administrator.

Outside of Wikipedia, what do you do for a living?

I work in an upscale restaurant in Buffalo, New York.

What languages do you speak?

English.

'''Why do you want to join the Board? What qualities do you feel you can bring to the Board?'''

The Board needs to take more interest in the smaller projects and not ignore individual project needs. I hope to change that.

About how much time do you think you'll put into the role?

As much as possible.

Ideally, where do you see the Wikimedia Foundation in 5 years?

The biggest provider of free information on the web.

As a board member, how will you ensure a balance between openness and necessary privacy in board matters?

By allowing Board minutes to be public whenever possible.

'''Recent discussion has centered around the Wikipedia and Wikimedia brands. How do you feel the Wikimedia brands should be used, or changed?'''

We should use them in a way that we can get money for them but al in a way that raises awareness about our organization being free to use, edit, and read.

'''Wikimedia projects in developing nations are growing in popularity, but still lag far behind the more popular projects. What steps would you suggest to improve the quality, readership, and number of editors on smaller wikis?'''

We do not advertise the Wikimedia foundation enough or its individual projects. We need to raise awareness that these projects exist and they are as free as the rest of the WMF projects.

What do you feel should be done to increase participation on non-Wikipedia projects?

Well for starters, more advertisement of existing projects on other existing projects. Maybe a little outside advertisement such as a YouTube video that UCLA made about the Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing, or BOINC].

As a board member, what strategies would you consider to raise money for the Foundation?

Longer, more publicized fund-raisers, grant options as there are many in the US, AN EXAMPLE ONLY: adding an outside/external search engine or something that a company would pay WMF to use on their projects.

What else do you want to say to voters?

The board need diversity. We have lawyers and professionals already. The board has lost its touch with time and needs to be more of a "everyday people" Board. Our contributers are mostly that: everyday people with everyday lives. We (the various projects) also need to work more together as opposed to trying to compete with each other. Our goals are the same, to provide free information to the world, and I also think that means efficiently and collaboratively.

Eloquence
Eloquence has indicated that he is traveling, and unable to answer the questions at this time.

Frieda
Candidate statement:

I have been involved in Wikipedia and other WMF projects since May 2003, being the first admin on it.wiki. In June 2005 I was one of the founders of Wikimedia Italia and the first president (still in the role). I'm bureaucrat on it.wiki, it.news, it.source and it.wikt. I'm a (not very active) member of the Special Projects Committee, an OTRS admin and press contact for it.wiki. I've some basic points and ideas:
 * WM projects must remain free and open
 * we have to share knowledge
 * WMF is a world wide organization
 * our communities are both precious and different
 * as a chapter member I see every day which are WMF problems: for instance, internal and external communication, clearness on which is the purpose of chapters, relationship with communities, donations and donors follow-up...
 * according to my experience, sharing free knowledge requires that you have something to share, and it's not so obvious: the world is full of unknown knowledge. A first step is to recognize this knowledge and making it accessible.
 * I'm convinced that WMF should invest in promoting and allowing further improvement of its own projects other than Wikipedia, especially in creating and growing these projects in disadvantaged areas, for instance Africa.
 * WMF has got an enormous potential, still used only in part. Until and unless WMF doesn't have a well defined structure, and an organization chart that includes the Board, the Communities and the Chapters, it will be difficult to handle.
 * Chapters are essential to the Foundation and they have to be properly used and strongly supported.

What current or former user rights or positions do you have, and on which projects?

I'm bureaucrat on it.wiki, it.wikt, it.source, it.news, president of WMI, OTRS admin, italian press contact.

Outside of Wikipedia, what do you do for a living?

According to Newsweek, I currently work as a programmer ;-)

What languages do you speak?

Italian and english. I can read some spanish and portoguese.

'''Why do you want to join the Board? What qualities do you feel you can bring to the Board?'''

I was asked to run for the Board last here, but when I started to write my presentation I discovered that I didn't have so much to say; then I was asked again this year.. ;-) I try to summarize my ideas in my candidate statement. I think that I can share my experience as a (founder) member of a Chapter, my organizational skill, and my origin (I'm a not-english native speaker, I'm european, I was here when italian community born..)

About how much time do you think you'll put into the role?

All the necessary, a night is long ;-) More seriously, at least a couple of hours a day.

Ideally, where do you see the Wikimedia Foundation in 5 years?

I don't have the necessary fancy, but in 5 years every Wikimedia project will be a leader in its field and WMF will be an opinion leader. Moreover we'll have gained stability in our practices and, why not?, finances.

As a board member, how will you ensure a balance between openness and necessary privacy in board matters?

There isn't a recipe in such a matter, I'll evaluate case by case. OTRS and WMI experiences will help.

'''Recent discussion has centered around the Wikipedia and Wikimedia brands. How do you feel the Wikimedia brands should be used, or changed?'''

In most cases Wikimedia brands must be enforced; in fact Wikipedia is, at present, the only identifiable and well know brand. I gave some answers to the survey on Meta, and I pointed out two facts: the first is that some names are too close to just one language (english) and sounds wrong in approximately all the others; second, all the logos should communicate a family feeling.

'''Wikimedia projects in developing nations are growing in popularity, but still lag far behind the more popular projects. What steps would you suggest to improve the quality, readership, and number of editors on smaller wikis?'''

It depends on different elements (project, language diffusion, number of speakers..) but generally speaking there're two good practice: facing with older and bigger project to learn from their experience, sometimes gathering help from the world outside. A virtual meeting point (pages on meta or an IRC channel) could be useful too. According to my experience in it.wiki, at the very beginning of a project, its size is the most important factor: it's necessary a certain number of articles to become visible in the Net, catch new contributors and "set up" the virtuous circle.

What do you feel should be done to increase participation on non-Wikipedia projects?

In part the same as above ;-) Besides anyone (in particular press contacts, chair of Chapters and every one who presents Wikimedia in public events) should cite other projects too.

As a board member, what strategies would you consider to raise money for the Foundation?

More attention to small donors and more care to OTRS donation queue (which is at present quit abandoned), more attention to proposals forwarded by the Chapters.

What else do you want to say to voters?

Candidates are not names. Please, read our statement and our answers :-)

Kate
Kate has not responded to the questions yet.

Kim Bruning
Candidate statement:

Hello, my name is Kim Bruning. I have been somewhat responsible for restoring and maintaining dispute resolution on enwiki. I now work mostly on process, and occasionally help with emergencies. I have also been coding and helping out on Omegawiki, starting this year.

For the foundation, the issues of day to day management, servers, and continuity are important. I think we all agree on that, so let's look at a different issue: There are currently 700 wikis in over 250 languages across many projects. Communication between those wikis is practically none-existent, making it hard for people to learn from each other.

Examples:
 * One wiki was banning admins from a different wiki
 * Several wikis don't use consensus
 * One wiki had a POV-violation in the site-notice
 * Many wikis have never heard of Assume Good Faith

We also need to think more about talking with other non-profit organizations. They may have already learned lessons that we are still struggling with. So day to day management, and improvement of internal and external communication is what I'd like to work on these coming two years. If you want to help me achieve that, please vote for me, or contact me, or both!

What current or former user rights or positions do you have, and on which projects?

I actually try to avoid having different strange flags, since I think they promote hierarchy and bureaucracy, which are slow poisons to networked organizations. I did hold an admin (sysop) bit for a year on the English wikipedia. It turns out that most of the time, you don't really need an admin bit to maintain order and keep wikipedians in your neighborhood happy. It took people around me almost half a year to discover that I had handed my bit in. I could request the abmin bit back anytime I like, but I haven't really seen any need, recently.

Outside of Wikipedia, what do you do for a living?

I'm having great fun coding mediawiki extensions for pay at the moment, and have some serious thoughts of making a career of it. I know at least one or two people who will cheer when they read that ;-)

What languages do you speak?

I speak English and Dutch fairly well. I speak enough German to be able to survive in Germany and learn more, and I knew enough French and Latin to pass my high-school exams.

'''Why do you want to join the Board? What qualities do you feel you can bring to the Board?'''

I want to run for the board to promote my platform (which is better communication between wikis). Also, with approval voting, if I run, I make it easier for people to reasonably withhold votes from less suitable candidates (this is superior to one man one vote, where I would end up "stealing votes" from suitable candidates instead.)  I want to be on the board because I think I know what I'm doing, while I have some concerns about one or two of the other people who are running.

Besides the standard rosy visions and promises of staunch maintenance that every candidate promises, my main contribution is my ability to get people to cooperate and work together across the net with a minimum of fuss and (wiki)drama. If you're familiar with how many of our projects are run, you probably won't have a hard time understanding why such a skill might be invaluable.

About how much time do you think you'll put into the role?

I've calculated that I can easily afford to invest as much as half of my waking hours in the board. Now that we are getting a new Executive director, I hope that it will be possible to spend rather less time than that, so I can also spend some of my time on other wiki-related areas.

Ideally, where do you see the Wikimedia Foundation in 5 years?

I think that as far as the foundation is concerned, income and expenditure should be somewhat more balanced, with part of the budget being covered by the foundation offering services to other nonprofits. I also hope that by that time we will have started saving money and building up its reserves for the very long run indeed, so that all the different wikiprojects we have will still be around in the long now, or at least for the next 100 years. ''I do know that that is an inconsequentially short time period for long now thinking, but you have to start small. Making a plan to last 100 years is herculean, but still just-about doable.''

As a board member, how will you ensure a balance between openness and necessary privacy in board matters?

I'm not sure the board should be handling private matters or micromanaging at all. Rather, it should be setting policy on how such things are to be done by others. This would allow board meetings to be fully public and transparent. Of course, that's the long term ideal. In the short term, I'd try to push for as much transparency as possible, and as much delegation of privacy related matters as is reasonably possible.

'''Recent discussion has centered around the Wikipedia and Wikimedia brands. How do you feel the Wikimedia brands should be used, or changed?'''

NB: ''It appears that this question was inadvertently not answered by Kim. Check back for an updated answer soon.''

'''Wikimedia projects in developing nations are growing in popularity, but still lag far behind the more popular projects. What steps would you suggest to improve the quality, readership, and number of editors on smaller wikis?'''

One of the best things you can do is to increase the size of the seed-page set. If your wiki is more useful to start with, you will attract more users to start with. You can create more seed pages by translating similar pages from other wikis. As to how to attract more translators, and how to make translation easier and cheaper, that's a long story, which does not quite fit in the width of this margin. For starters, we should put more priority on making mediawiki easy to use for translators.

What do you feel should be done to increase participation on non-Wikipedia projects?

These projects have been growing fairly well by themselves. Increased communication between different wikiprojects might help a lot. Another thing that might help is the legendary "real soon now" Single User Login system. We need to be thinking hard about how to relieve Brion of his daily chores and get him working hard on the actual SUL code.

As a board member, what strategies would you consider to raise money for the Foundation?

I would pursue Government (education) and NGO grants, non-intrusive sponsorship agreements (no advertising!), and using our expertise to offer services to other non-profits and even for-profits for money. All of these methods seem to fit well with the foundation philosophy of neutrality, and none of these have been pursued very much yet, and therefore seem to essentially be fallow ground. We should easily be able to cover our costs that way. Taking over the world with wikis, free content and free software and then make people pay for their own? Priceless!

What else do you want to say to voters?

Just because you've heard of someone doesn't necessarily make them a good candidate. Also remember that we are doing approval voting (right tool for right job). The strategy is to Vote for all candidates you find suitable. This way, it is most likely that a candidate you find suitable will indeed be appointed. Even if you don't vote for me: If you take this advice, you'll get the candidate that you want, and I'll have achieved at least one good thing by running already. :-)

Kingboyk
Candidate statement: I want to see a stronger and more democratic Foundation, better guidance and assistance for volunteers, and a sharpened focus on our core goals. The Foundation needs to be stronger, in terms of its vision, its leadership of our volunteer community, its brand, and its accountability.

As a Board member, I will advocate a roadmap for our future development. I will also focus on expanding our reach outside Europe and North America, and improving collaboration and idea-sharing between wikis. We have much to learn from each other! I will respectfully promote my view that all board members should be elected.

I have been a Wikipedian for 2 years. I'm an administrator on the English Wikipedia, an AWB developer, and I have co-written several Featured Articles. I have experience at a similar level to this role, having been a member of the Student Union Council and the Finance Committee at Brunel University. I live on a small farm in England.

This is a condensed version of my personal statement. Per the election rules, I have prepared a private personal platform statement which I invite all voters to read. Thank you.

Outside of Wikipedia, what do you do for a living?

I'm a programmer by trade.

What languages do you speak?

I am a native speaker of English, and I have GCSE French. Not terribly impressive, but languages are not my forte I'm afraid.

'''Why do you want to join the Board? What qualities do you feel you can bring to the Board?'''

I think the Board needs my help, and I'd like to step up my involvement in our project. As for qualities, I'm a quiet consensus builder but I'm fiercely dedicated to our project. I have technical knowledge, some modest experience of not-for-profit governance (former member of a Student Union Council and Finance Committee), and a basic understanding of law and accounting. Most importantly, I am an experienced Wikipedian.

About how much time do you think you'll put into the role?

I'll put in whatever it takes. An existing board member has estimated that he spends 20 hours per week on WMF issues. That seems to me extraordinarily high and perhaps an indication that the Board is either not delegating sufficiently or is distracted from it's mission; however, if 20 hours per week is what it takes I will do it.

Ideally, where do you see the Wikimedia Foundation in 5 years?

Financially stable, and firmly entrenched as one of the web's most popular and most useful properties. In 5 years time we should not just have a clear roadmap but we should be well on our way down the road. I'd hope also that by 2012 we will have taken some very serious steps towards improving the quality of our offering. On this wiki in particular we need to be focussing far more on quality rather than quantity.

As a board member, how will you ensure a balance between openness and necessary privacy in board matters?

Notes of all board meetings should default to "public", with only confidential information removed. As elected and accountable trustees we should have nothing to hide, except in rare cases where the privacy of third parties is at stake or where we are dealing with truly sensitive commercial information. I would also point out that I stand for a fully elected board; I believe nobody, including Jimbo, is entitled to a seat for life.

'''Recent discussion has centered around the Wikipedia and Wikimedia brands. How do you feel the Wikimedia brands should be used, or changed?'''

I'm not decided on this yet but think we need to review it as part of our roadmap. Wikipedia is our best known brand; Wikimedia is vulnerable to confusion with Mediawiki. We also have one or two projects which are a little off-message (our business should be the creation of original, free educational material). Those might be better spun off in their own interests as much as the Foundation's. I do not propose any wholesale shedding of projects, however, and I imagine that in 5 years time we will have more projects or brands than we do now.

'''Wikimedia projects in developing nations are growing in popularity, but still lag far behind the more popular projects. What steps would you suggest to improve the quality, readership, and number of editors on smaller wikis?'''

The difficulty in the poorest nations is that so few people have access to computers and the internet. I am terribly concerned, however, about our penetration outside Europe and North America. In particular, countries such as Malaysia and Thailand are increasingly affluent, with good levels of internet access, but the wikis in their languages have very low traffic. I've proposed in my candidacy that we must engage in active promotion in these geographical areas, perhaps by sending somebody out there on a media blitz or by working with Wikimedians from those areas.

What do you feel should be done to increase participation on non-Wikipedia projects?

Most of them are growing quite well organically, but it would certainly be helpful if our press releases and media appearances mentioned the other projects more often. With regards to Board membership, the Board must not neglect these other projects and I will always endeavour to help editors from other projects as best I can. Beyond that, people need to feel motivated to take part, we can't pressgang them.

As a board member, what strategies would you consider to raise money for the Foundation?

I'd consider anything which didn't compromise our integrity or interfere with our goals. As we grow, I feel that we must increasingly look to grants from charitable funds and other large donors.

What else do you want to say to voters?

Please don't be apathetic. This is your project, and you've committed a lot of time to it, so make sure you vote! Don't let other people make the decision for you. If you want a new face on the Board, an ordinary editor who believes in accountability, transparency and an elected Board, then you should put an x next to my name.

Michael Snow
Candidate statement:

I respect what the Wikimedia Foundation has accomplished so far with limited resources and many forces pulling on it. I want to fill some of the gaps and make it a more functional organization. Finances are a constant issue, as Wikimedia must bring in more money and find new donation sources. Brand name value can help support operating funds, but this must be done carefully to preserve neutrality and also protect brands from outsiders trying to exploit them. Relationships with each project and its diverse participants need to be cultivated. The board must listen carefully to reflect the will of the community and not just the loudest voices.

Beyond working on Wikipedia articles, my Wikimedia experience has covered a variety of areas. For many, if you recognize my name it may be because I started The Wikipedia Signpost at the beginning of 2005. Although not intended as a universal news source for Wikimedia issues, it's perhaps as useful as any other source, and it has many readers from languages and projects other than just the English Wikipedia. My other Wikimedia involvement has included serving as chair of the Communications committee. As a lawyer, I have also given occasional advice to the Wikimedia Foundation, when its legal needs coincide with my ability to help. I believe that I understand the challenges and would bring a valuable perspective to the board.

What current or former user rights or positions do you have, and on which projects?

I'm an administrator on the English Wikipedia. I've been urged to become a bureaucrat there as well, but chose not to. I declined partly because I didn't want to pursue it simply to collect a status marker — also because I dislike the name, although I understand it was chosen so the position would seem less like a status marker. I have avoided other positions primarily because they might be incompatible with my ongoing work on The Wikipedia Signpost.

Outside of Wikipedia, what do you do for a living?

I work in educational publishing, specializing in professional training related to real estate. I write textbooks and supplemental course materials, and also design online courses, which are a popular choice for students in this field. As an attorney, I focus on the legal issues involved in working in the industry.

What languages do you speak?

English, French, and German.

'''Why do you want to join the Board? What qualities do you feel you can bring to the Board?'''

I've put a considerable amount of effort into the Wikimedia Foundation and its projects. I believe it has noble ambitions and want to help it succeed. In terms of what I personally have to offer, I think I can add a greater degree of professionalism, along with the knowledge and skills I have from my legal training.

About how much time do you think you'll put into the role?

Elsewhere I estimated roughly 15-20 hours a week, based on the current situation and the kind of activity the board is involved in. This is substantially more than a board position should normally require, and I would like to make progress in scaling this back, but it may be necessary at least in the near term.

Ideally, where do you see the Wikimedia Foundation in 5 years?

I think it should be in a better position to actively grow its projects and promote them externally (especially those other than the largest Wikipedia languages), instead of simply maintaining an operational status quo. This requires better organization, funding and cooperation with partners. Another long-term goal is establishing an endowment to ensure greater financial stability for the Wikimedia Foundation.

As a board member, how will you ensure a balance between openness and necessary privacy in board matters?

Many public bodies have obligations to conduct business openly and allow their actions to be subject to scrutiny. The standard procedure they use for business that cannot be completely public is to conduct it privately in "executive session" using established criteria to determine when private deliberation is called for. When using such arrangements, votes are normally held in public even when dealing with issues that were discussed in executive session. For everything else, full records can be examined as well as proper summaries. I think a model along these lines would address concerns in this area.

'''Recent discussion has centered around the Wikipedia and Wikimedia brands. How do you feel the Wikimedia brands should be used, or changed?'''

I think developing a more distinctive visual presentation for each project/brand, and addressing some of the individualized technical needs on those projects, has the potential to strengthen all of the brands, especially those other than Wikipedia.

'''Wikimedia projects in developing nations are growing in popularity, but still lag far behind the more popular projects. What steps would you suggest to improve the quality, readership, and number of editors on smaller wikis?'''

The first step would have to be a study to identify the obstacles to broader adoption. Some of these, such as limited internet access, can't be directly addressed by Wikimedia, although alternate methods of distribution can serve as a work-around. For any barriers that the Wikimedia Foundation is capable of dealing with, the next step would be to identify what resources can be devoted to the effort of overcoming them.

What do you feel should be done to increase participation on non-Wikipedia projects?

Along the lines of my response to one of the earlier questions, I think fostering a more distinctive identity for them will increase the motivation of people to participate. Trying to recruit people who don't already have some natural enthusiasm for a project is unlikely to help much, but each project draws a somewhat distinctive profile of participants, and strengthening the project's individuality will make it more attractive to people who fit that profile.

As a board member, what strategies would you consider to raise money for the Foundation?

Large donations and substantial grants, in particular. The pool of small individual contributions is a helpful base to start from, and has done much to get the Wikimedia Foundation this far, but as financial needs increase in scale, the tools to address them must scale up as well. Strategies to increase the small-contribution pool, other than any natural growth, seem likely to have low yields and be relatively unattractive options. The typical example is soliciting potential donors externally — work that other nonprofits often contract out to professional fundraising companies, with the result that the organization nets much less than is ostensibly donated.

What else do you want to say to voters?

Anyone who has edited enough to be eligible to vote is, based on that alone, more personally involved in the activity of the Wikimedia Foundation than the average person gets personally involved in the work of their national government. Assuming you think it's important to cast an informed vote in a national election (presuming you're eligible to vote), this suggests you would have just as many reasons to participate in this election. Please consider the candidates carefully, and I hope you'll support me as someone well-qualified to serve on the board.

Mindspillage
Mindspillage has not responded to the questions yet.

Oscar
Candidate statement:

i am a professional composer and teacher at the rotterdam conservatory, in my professional career i have been an interim manager for years as well. having been appointed as an elected community-member to the expanded board of trustees in december 2006, i had the honor to serve a 6 month term since (see further explanation). having grown up from the projects, i became a sysop at nlwiki in may 2004, on meta in april 2005, and have been a steward since june 2005; i was founding and first president of wikimedia nederland, a member of the now dormant special projects committee, and currently chair of the audit committee. i have tried my best to still keep in touch with as many of basic things as possible going on in the projects, not an easy job for a busy board member. in the frankfurt board retreat of 2006 (see my report) i compared wikimedia to a giant with feet of clay, this has been my main worry and concern: to consolidate the organisation of volunteers (like i myself am) with a core of newly hired skilled people, which supports our further growth into the future and remain an independent organization. since this is only partly accomplished, i would like to further contribute to the next steps, which will enhance our growth and outreach, our quality and stability, our independence and responsibility. i believe we are in fact a new 21st century generation of "encyclopedists", collecting more than knowledge alone: edito ergo sum (quotation).

What current or former user rights or positions do you have, and on which projects?


 * admin on metawiki and on most dutch language projects
 * bureaucrat on metawiki and on dutch wikipedia, wikinews and wikibooks
 * steward on metawiki
 * i founded a "rules and regulations committee" on dutch wikipedia
 * member of the dormant special projects committee
 * former founding president and board member of wikimedia nederland (i resigned from the board to avoid any conflict of interests)

Outside of Wikipedia, what do you do for a living?

i am a professional composer, member of componisten96 and teacher of music theory and composition as well as graduation thesis counsellor at codarts, the rotterdam conservatory.

What languages do you speak?

native dutch, near-native german and english, fluent in french. working knowledge of spanish and italian, and also some swedish, turkish and spoken cantonese.

'''Why do you want to join the Board? What qualities do you feel you can bring to the Board?'''

i am a professional composer and teacher at the rotterdam conservatory, in my professional career i have been an interim manager for years as well. it is an honor to have been added to the extended board and to have served as a board member since december 2006, but it is a pity that it was only for 6 months, in which there were a lot of difficult and urgent decisions to be made; i would appreciate a full term in which there is more opportunity to develop my ideas and initiatives (such as advisory council, statistics integration in management information system etc).

About how much time do you think you'll put into the role?

i resigned as president of wikimedia nederland to avoid any conflict of interests, but also because of the work involved. i expect to again invest/spend in between 15 and 40 hours per week, depending on the moment, like i did until now.

Ideally, where do you see the Wikimedia Foundation in 5 years?

50 wikimedia projects in different languages with over half a million articles, 50 wikimedia chapters on all habitable continents around the world founded, at least one staffed office on each continent, all with the wikimedia foundation still non-profit, independent and of course the mission unaltered.

As a board member, how will you ensure a balance between openness and necessary privacy in board matters?

looking again at the election platforms, i recently decided i must and shall start a similar platform when elected for after the elections as well (yes: that is a promise), to create more openness and feedback from the communites, the latter is indeed our biggest asset, more important than the trademarks even.

'''Recent discussion has centered around the Wikipedia and Wikimedia brands. How do you feel the Wikimedia brands should be used, or changed?'''

please look at my edits on that metawiki page; i am very happy with the survey because this taps into the power and ideas of our community, a thing i want the board to do more structurally in fact.

'''Wikimedia projects in developing nations are growing in popularity, but still lag far behind the more popular projects. What steps would you suggest to improve the quality, readership, and number of editors on smaller wikis?'''

being a teacher myself, i know there is a lot of interest in all our projects (not just wikipedia) for use in education: we need to team up with such organizations. chapters can and should play a major role in this, which is why we should continue to (help) develop chapters.

What do you feel should be done to increase participation on non-Wikipedia projects?

create more awareness through a clearer wikimedia-brand and consequent use of coherent logo-design.

As a board member, what strategies would you consider to raise money for the Foundation?

more effective use of our brands and tapping into the huge potential of regular *big* sponsoring by friendly foundations (even in the u.s. this is a largely unused potential until now).

What else do you want to say to voters?

some critics seem to believe in a more centrally governed wikimedia foundation, even ruled by outside specialists. i on the other hand believe in our fundamental and main potential as a grassroots-organization that develops chapters worldwide and becomes a kind of "mycelium", a more network-like worldwide structure that does not have a single point of failure!

UninvitedCompany
Candidate statement:

I've been involved for over four years, now, and have held a variety of volunteer posts with ENWP and with the Foundation. I was probably best known for my OTRS work up until my recent election to the ENWP arbitration committee. I work as a software development manager and as a semiprofessional musician in addition to my volunteer work.

In essence, the purpose of my candidacy is to bring a higher degree of professionalism to the Board of Trustees and the daily operations of the Foundation. The Foundation needs to attract large donors to maintain solvency without resorting to advertising. To attract large donors, the leadership of the Foundation from the Board on down must be professional and responsible, and must be able to reconcile the unique values of the constituent projects with the expectations of the donor community. This will involve bylaws changes to assure donors that future boards will be well qualified. It will also require that we make the Executive Director position an attractive one to the top-flight talent we want. That will mean more delegation and will require a board that is comfortable leading rather than doing. As a member of the Board of Trustees, my work would be directed almost exclusively towards making these changes.

What current or former user rights or positions do you have, and on which projects?

On the English Wikipedia, I'm a current and past member of the arbitration committee, an administrator, and a "bureaucrat." I also have access to the checkuser tool. Elsewhere, I am an OTRS admin, and an admin on Meta.

Outside of Wikipedia, what do you do for a living?

I work as a software engineering manager for a large corporation. I am also a semi-professional musician.

What languages do you speak?

I speak English, and a little bit of Spanish.

'''Why do you want to join the Board? What qualities do you feel you can bring to the Board?'''

I want to join the board because I care deeply about Wikipedia and its sister projects, and because I'm increasingly concerned about the direction the Foundation has taken. I believe that I can make a difference because I have the business and organizational background, and because I know my way around the projects and the Foundation due to my involvement.

About how much time do you think you'll put into the role?

More than I should.

Ideally, where do you see the Wikimedia Foundation in 5 years?

I would like to see it fully funded and organizationally stable, with a clear plan for the ensuing five years.

As a board member, how will you ensure a balance between openness and necessary privacy in board matters?

I don't think the board engages with the community enough at present. Part of this is that there is little to share with the community because the board has such a difficult time arriving at decisions that the community finds significant. There's too much board involvement in minor matters which by their nature require more confidentiality. The board should rise above that, work in larger brushstrokes, and have a strategy for working with the various communities it serves.

'''Recent discussion has centered around the Wikipedia and Wikimedia brands. How do you feel the Wikimedia brands should be used, or changed?'''

I think that the name of the WikiMedia Foundation should be changed due to the ongoing public confusion with Wikipedia, MediaWiki, wikis in general, and Wikia. I would think that a name that contains neither "Wiki," "Pedia," nor "Media" would be best (I don't have a specific suggestion).

'''Wikimedia projects in developing nations are growing in popularity, but still lag far behind the more popular projects. What steps would you suggest to improve the quality, readership, and number of editors on smaller wikis?'''

I believe that they should be spun out to a foundation of their own because the WMF is unable to care for them properly and is unlikely to be able to do so any time in the foreseeable future. Alternatively, large projects like ENWP, DEWP, FRWP, and JAWP could be spun out so that the remaining organization can focus on the projects still in their growth stages.

What do you feel should be done to increase participation on non-Wikipedia projects?

By the board? Nothing, although again some of these should be spun out so that they can have a decisionmaking body that is accountable to them. Any time a smaller sister project has to compete with the large Wikipedias for management attention or technical work, they will lose. The smaller projects suffer for this.

As a board member, what strategies would you consider to raise money for the Foundation?

Make the foundation more attractive to large donors by improving accountability and predictability. I have an essay on this here.

What else do you want to say to voters?

The turnout at past elections has been limited. I truly hope that every editor at ENWP will take the time to review the candidates' qualifications and background and cast their votes. There are some excellent candidates running this time who have the background to make a difference and move the foundation forward, and they deserve our support.

WarX
WarX has not responded to the questions yet.

Yann
Yann has not responded to the questions yet.

^demon
Candidate statement:

Wikipedia is an absolutely phenomenal thing. The Wikimedia Foundation exists to support both Wikipedia and its many sister projects by providing both financial and infrastructural support. It stands to reason that we need people on the Board who understand what we're really here for--providing as much freely-licensed content to as many people as possible in their own native language. The Board of Directors should have, nay, needs to have people who are as closely aligned with this guiding principle as possible. As a board member, I would strive to play towards my individual strengths of management, technical know-how, and my ability to communicate with others. However, none of us must ever be too proud to not stop and ask for help; be it from outside help, developers, local administrators, and even the normal day-to-day contributors--both registered and anonymous. I believe many times those involved "higher-up" in the running of the Foundation can, at times, lose sight of that core policy I highlighted. This is something I promise to never do.

I believe that the Foundation is currently making a major mistake on what has recently to me become a very major issue. The WMF has long held a policy of "No Open Proxies" allowed for editing. The feeling has often been that quite a large amount of vandalism is coming from such proxies. The ability has long existed for us to be able to soft-block those proxies (in that registered users can edit, but anonymous ones cannot). For quite some time, Tor was soft-blocked. However, earlier this year, unilateral action was taken to hard block all of these proxies, preventing even valuable users from being able to contribute. When Board members were contacted, they did nothing. Rather, Jimbo encouraged discussion, which got nowhere due to a set mindset that is impossible to break. In the meantime, other users were mowed down for this same issue. Are we to allow the projects to lose highly valuable and valued contributors simply because the Foundation will not act? If I am elected, I would like to have the issue visited at a Foundation-level. While we may not see the results I would prefer, I would like to see the Foundation at least exert effort to see if this policy does in fact need revising, rather than the lack of action by anyone.

What current or former user rights or positions do you have, and on which projects?

Only user right I've ever had is sysop on enwiki.

Outside of Wikipedia, what do you do for a living?

Part time student, part time computer programmer.

What languages do you speak?

English, and some French.

'''Why do you want to join the Board? What qualities do you feel you can bring to the Board?'''

Honestly, I want to be on the Board to serve the community. I know how cliché that sounds, but it's really my reason for running. I don't have ulterior motives. I don't care about power, I simply wish to represent the community and have our voice heard on the Board.

About how much time do you think you'll put into the role?

As much as it takes. Honestly, I am willing to devote as much time of my life as required of me. I spend inordinate amounts of time on Wikipedia as is, so redirecting my activities to the Foundation wouldn't be a hassle for me.

Ideally, where do you see the Wikimedia Foundation in 5 years?

I would love to see the Foundation providing even more content to even more people. I think this is our primary goal and something we should strive for. Multimedia would be nice, so we can provide videos and audio to users to enrich the original textual content.

As a board member, how will you ensure a balance between openness and necessary privacy in board matters?

There are some things that should be open, and some things that should be private. Given the open nature of our work, I believe we can be more open in terms of finances, policy, and things of that nature. However, issues such as legal disputes with individuals or the setup of the server cluster's security are things that obviously should be kept private for what I see as uncontroversial reasons.

'''Recent discussion has centered around the Wikipedia and Wikimedia brands. How do you feel the Wikimedia brands should be used, or changed?'''

I think the brands obviously need protection. They are highly recognizable and need to be shielded from potential misuse. That being said, I think they should not be changed, as they are so recognizable. To change the well-known Wikipedia logo would be a mistake, in my opinion.

'''Wikimedia projects in developing nations are growing in popularity, but still lag far behind the more popular projects. What steps would you suggest to improve the quality, readership, and number of editors on smaller wikis?'''

I think this is something that falls to the communities themselves. Without a strong community to support a language, there cannot be substantial growth. I believe it is up to the speakers of that language to branch out to other members of their families and local communities to encourage participation.

What do you feel should be done to increase participation on non-Wikipedia projects?

I think they need to be more greatly advertised. I'm not saying posting banner ads on websites, as Wikipedia's growth has been entirely word of mouth. However, I think their prominence should be increased in media coverage of the Foundation's activities, if possible.

As a board member, what strategies would you consider to raise money for the Foundation?

I believe the current methods of fund raisers has been highly successful, and I believe it should be continued and encouraged. In addition, federal and private grants could be considered, provided they have no strings attached, as I would not wish to encroach on our policy of Neutral Point of View.

What else do you want to say to voters?

I think the Board needs a new face to it. That's not to say that I have a lack of faith in the current Board, however I think that we've reached a point where we can say "Ok, you've served your turn, time for some fresh faces." While I may not have a degree in law or accounting, I am an intelligent individual dedicated to the ideals of the project.