Your current geographic location, along with your age: Park Slope, Brooklyn , N.Y., U.S.A., 50 years young.
Projects with significant contributions (please both name the language and project, and link to your contributions): I have contributed primarily in the English[1] and Meta [2] wikis with some contributions on the French Wikipédia [3] and on Commons [4].
Do you have any rights (i.e. admin, bureaucrat) or positions (i.e. dispute resolution, CheckUser, etc.) on any of those projects? If so, which ones? When did you get elected or promoted for each one? I was made an administrator on the English Wikipedia several years ago; appointed in meta as an admin and an account on the foundation wiki[5] (for legal issues such as fund raising pages and designated agent notices). I was originally appointed to the Mediation Committee on the English Wikipedia and served as an advisor there due to my knowledge about mediation and arbitration. I also founded the Association of Members' Advocates, an association that is not official part of any Wikipedia project but was started to help Wikipedians negotiate the dispute resolution process on the English Wikipedia. Currently I am a member of the volunteer Legal Department of the Wikimedia Foundation and have previously served as counsel to Wikimedia over the past several years by helping Jimmy draft the bylaws, complete the application for tax exempt status and as attorney of record for several of Wikimedia’s trademark applications with the USPTO. I did all this work in a pro bono capacity (without any compensation for my time or expenses).
Do you hold any universal rights (i.e. steward, etc.) for Wikimedia Projects? If so, since when? No, none except those "rights" granted by virtue of being a member of the Wikimedia Legal department which make me privy to certain discussion lists and confidential information sources that are necessary to my work as one of Wikimedia's volunteer lawyers; most would probably call these "obligations" and not "rights".
When did you first start contributing to Wikimedia projects? Why and how did you initially join? In the spring of 2003. I thought the idea of contributing to an online encyclopedia was an incredible opportunity, it still is. My first recorded edits were disambiguations of the towns of Brest in France and Brest in Belarus (also known as Brest-Litovsk). I was also fascinated by the open source nature of Wikipedia and the viral licensing scheme that Jimmy had chosen and that the decision was taken to make Wikimedia a non-profit organization and not another commercial venture as most of the dot coms have been to date.
Briefly describe your career ("real-life"). How do you think this will help you be a successful Board member? I am a lawyer, artist (film and video), writer, and volunteer. I have dealt with NPOs (non-profit organizations) in the past as a board member, staff member and volunteer both in the United States and Canada and I am knowledgeable about fund raising, issues of organizational management and governance. I have posted a very detailed biography of myself on my meta user page (Malheursement c'est seulement en anglaise).
Of all the candidates right now, why do you stand out from the field? What makes you the best candidate? Not really believing in "best" (is that NPOV?) my answer will have to be more multi-dimensional. Why did I decide to run? Because I see that the organization is in need of people who know something of the mechanics of NPO governance and management and can help the other board members in the decision making process that will help make the organization stronger and more stable while being sensitive to the needs of the various Wikimedia communities. Also, I think I am the only canadidate that is an armiger (joke, but true).
A knowledge of several languages has been cited as a key requirement for a Board member. Do you speak any other languages other than English? Yes, French, I read and speak it quite well, I took many courses at McGill University Faculty of Law in Montréal in French such as Canadian Constitutional Law and Business Associations. I did quite well in all French courses that I took. I have some spoken Russian skill (from childhood and travels throughout eastern Europe in the last ten years) and can read cyrillic texts. I can also read some Spanish and Italian. Having studied history and law in French I am familiar with the differences between many of the legal systems in the world, common law, civil law and socialist legal systems -- this jurilinguistic knowledge is a definite plus.
Why do you think language is or isn't critical to the Board? I think that the Board is an American legal entity, it needs to operate in English, but obviously its projects are international in scope and for that a knowledge of other languages, and perhaps, sensitivity to other cultures is even more important. I am a dual citizen having lived both in the United States and Canada, so I understand differences in culture and even how people who speak the same language can have very different cultural and historical reference points; I very much try to be sensitive to these differences even when they are relatively subtle as they are often very important to the individuals or groups involved.
What do you expect to do while serving on the Board? What are your expectations? Go to or attend meetings; have discussions with other board members; find out what the staff is doing; assist with committee work. Being on the board of an NPO is hard work, but I am ready, willing and able to volunteer at that level of commitment; I have the time to contribute.
What can you bring to the Board? What can you contribute to the Wikimedia Foundation? Legal expertise with NPOs, familiarity with trademark and copyright law, fund raising expertise, knowing the difference between governance and management; knowledge of various legal systems and cultural differences between management styles and cultural expectations of governance roles. I expect to contribute to the board by communicating with anyone involved in Wikimedia projects, Wikimedia chapters and bringing issues and concerns to the board when it is relevant to the issues at hand. The most important thing is communication because no board member can act in a vacuum and board members do the best job when they listen to each other and try to discover the real issues and respond to them appropriately as a group.
Describe the one issue that you think is most pressing and pertinent to the Foundation right now, and how you would approach the situation. Continued interaction between the Board and the developing committee structure and other volunteer activities that can help expand the strength of our communities and projects. Wikimedians are an incredible resource that can help WMF and my feeling is that their raw energy can always be better utilized. While WMF has some financial resources for a minimal paid staff, work by volunteers is the way Wikipedia has exploded -- perhaps more of that collaborative work ethic can be harnessed on an organizational level as well (maybe the development of more volunteer coordination). It needs to be studied more and considered more over time.
What is your vision of the Board in the Foundation hierarchy? The board is legally the body that is empowered to "steer" the organization like a ship (in Québec some organizations call the board the "steering commmittee" in English as a preferred translation from the French "conseil d'administration") and not really to "run" the organization. Staff should deal with a lot of day-to-day issues and bring whatever is necessary to the board or executive committee's attention; the projects should really run themselves -- as far as content is concerned, I don't think the board should get involved except in legal circumstances and then in the most circumspect way possible. Obviously board members do not fire the engines, nor do they hoist the sails, but board members must make sure that the engines are strong enough to run the ship and the sails have people to maintain them so they don't get ripped up in the strong winds that will no doubt be encountered. Individuals and other entities donate to WMF because they believe in Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects, therefore being a member of the board is a position of trust to make sure that the organization charts a good course to get to its intended destination making sure that staff and volunteers keeps to that course over time.
How do you feel about the current leadership? We all owe a great debt to Jimbo, after all he has contributed a lot to Wikipedia and I think we all see that he is genuinely concerned with the stable growth and credibility of the base of encyclopedic knowledge that is emerging. I don't see the board as micro-managing any projects. It should be there to develop the public trust that has been placed in it already by the large base that is supporting the work that it is doing. The board should look at all issues in a careful, thoughtful manner to make sure that the aims of the Foundation are further developed and continued in the most free and yet responsible ways possible.
As a Board member, you will be serving as a representative of the communities. Do you think you can represent the community and understand its concerns? Why? Having been a very active Wikipedian in the past (I think I was in the top 500 English Wikipedia editors for while) and having been to meetups and Wikimania 2006 has been a plus. What is incredible about WMF is that we can all communicate with each other. I don't think this has ever happened in any organization on this scale in the history of humanity, and my hope is that the future is only open to more collaboration on a mass scale that transcends international borders, languages and cultures. Of course we can't all be on the board of an NPO, by necessity it must be governed by a limited number of people, and it is doubtful that most people would really want the position, but those of us willing to do so need to be responsive to anyone who can provide useful input to the board as an gropu of decision makers. Being on the board is not about pushing an agenda, in my opinion, it is about giving the board, the staff and organizational volunteers the needed information, expertise, input and support so that decisions can be taken as a group that are sensitive to the real needs of the many communities that the WMF serves.
What do you think of the Wikimedia Foundation and its mission in general? If you could change one thing about the running of the Foundation, what would you change? Generally WMF has been extremely successful in fulfilling its mission so far. Legally the foundation was founded in June 2003. I know of few organizations that have achieved international prominence or such a donor base in the span of three years. In the future there might be more of a focus on offline fund raising and eventually it might be a good idea for WMF to have a permanent home (and not just only one dedicated server farm) and even several international branch facilities that insure the continued existence of all the databases (in case of any catastrophes) and provide places (perhaps decentralized and run or funded by other the other international Wikimedia entities) where staff and volunteers could continue the work of the Foundation and meet on occasion when necessary.
If elected, can and will you devote the appropriate time and other resources needed to serve on the Board? As I am in private practice I manage my own time and can set time off from my schedule to attend meetings, IRC chats, etc. I do not foresee any problem along this line. I have volunteered on many NPO boards and I take such obligations seriously.
Have you ever attended Wikimania or any other meetup? What role do you think these meetups play? As stated above, yes, I attended Wikimania 2006 and started a meetup group here in NYC. It has been great to meet many Wikimedians from all over the world. Organizing a meetup in New York was good and hopefully in the future we can have more meetups. It is a useful way for people to get to know each other and also to do more local activities and do things like sponsor local events.
Please list (and link) any other pages where you have gotten questions and comments pertaining to the Board elections; we are compiling all of the questions and would appreciate this. I have asked that questions be put on my meta talk page.
What would you say to a potential voter who is undecided right now? Read all the candidates statements, ask questions and try to make the most infomed choice you can make, and above all vote.
Is there anything else you would like to mention? Wikipedia is an phenomenon that is unique and has become a mass collaboration unequalled in the history of the peoples of the world. Everyone who contributes (be it money, editing, or various associational activities like editing the Signpost) is what is making Wiki[p~m]edia so incredible. Don't forget that!
