Michelle
Would you let us know how much of the donors' money will be spent on this
legal brief, either directly or in the costs of staff time, please?
It would also be of interest to know why you felt that the input of the WMF
to this brief was essential given that there are 90 other organisations
involved?
"Rogol"
On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Mike Godwin <mnemonic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Yair Rand writes:
I find it difficult to believe that this
situation is so critical
and urgent that an RfC in advance was impossible, so if it does fall
under
that section, the policy was yet again violated.
I don't find it difficult at all to believe time was of the essence,
but, then, I'm an attorney who's worked for many years on
collaborative efforts, including but not limited to legal action.
I grant, of course, that your experience with doing legal and
public-policy assessments may be different. But if your view is that
either the Board of Trustees or WMF staff cannot be trusted to make
these assessments, then I urge you to explain in more depth why you
think this is so.
My own experience has been that quite often the Board or the WMF staff
have to make quick decisions, especially when the timeline for
decision-making is not in WMF's control. Certainly I often was called
upon to make decisions on behalf of WMF and the Wikimedia movement on
timelines that made consultation with Wikimedia-l or with committees
and affiliated organizations unworkable. I hope you don't find that
difficult to believe.
Please assume good faith.
Best,
--Mike
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>