Thread:Excellent set of questions (2)

My suggested answers to these questions are as follows.


 * Nine people seems like a reasonable number for the Board.


 * In the first election, I believe that nine nominees should be elected. The three with the most votes should hold three year terms, those in fourth through sixth place should hold two year terms, and those in seventh through ninth place should hold one year terms.


 * In all subsequent years, three board members should each be elected to three year terms.


 * If a Board member resigns, dies, or otherwise leaves office, his/her term will be completed by the person who received the most votes in the most recent election who did not win a seat.


 * I'm not sure how to approach gender parity and regional distribution. Some clarification from CoL about their expectations would be helpful.  We could go anywhere from simply advising voters to keep these objectives in mind all the way to enforcing quotas.


 * I support as low a threshold for nominations as possible, although I'm not opposed to a minimal procedure that discourages frivolous candidates and prevents an unwieldy number of nominees. I'd be interested in learning more about WMF's process.


 * I'm not sure I'm excited about having every single accountholder be able to vote. I wouldn't object to some minimum measure of activity if others agree.  If the electorate is defined as anything other than user accounts, however, then it will raise the question of what "2500" means for this process -- user accounts or potential voters?


 * I support the Board appointing an Executive Director. There have been a number of times when Wayne acted unilaterally, because circumstances required it.  He was right to do so, obviously, but appointing an Executive Director would be a means to cover those eventualities without there being any gray area.