[Foundation-l] Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation : le ver dans le fruit ?

[notafish]

Just making clear that I only translated for understanding purposes. I
do not agree with anything on that text. And I second Yann in his
reply.

Best,

Delphine


On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:21:17 +0100, notafish <notafishz at gmail.com> wrote:
> Please find herewith a revised translation for better understanding.
> 
> > I posted the following text:  "Wikimedia
> > Foundation:  the worm in the fruit?  At the
> > time of the constituent assembly of the French
> > association Wikimedia France, the subject came up
> > that Jimmy Wales and Wikimedia
> > Foundation would refuse  the right to use
> > the trademarks which it held (Wikimedia,
> > Wikipedia, Wktionary, Wikibooks...) if
> > the Foundation did not have a right of veto
> > (the term was debated) on the decisions
> > that the French foundation would make.
> > At the same time, during the creation of
> > Wikimedia Foundation, Jimmy Wales imposed 3
> > seats out of 5, and reserved himself the seat of
> > president, the 2 seats remaining being
> > provided by election (what led to 4
> > anglophone members out of 5).  This
> > way of doing things was not to be renewed, and a
> > really democratic election was to take
> > place this year (it is what had been known
> > as at the time).  One learns now that Jimmy
> > Wales intends to continue to reserve himself the
> > seat of president, with probably a right of
> > veto on the decisions.  A less democratic process
> > appears difficult.  The one year delay
> > was thus only one means of drowning fish.
> > This way of doing things should make us ask ourselves
> > certain number of questions:
> >*  What are these foundations used ?
> > *  Don't donators have a right to say something on
> > the use that is made of the money they gave?
> > * Isn't it deceiving people to make
> > believe that the foundation takes care of the
> > interests of Wikipedia, whereas it is only
> > a buttocks-organization, without any real
> > capacity of decision?
> >*  Isnt it deceiving to give the appearance of democracy
> >when it is not at all democratic?
> >*  What will the community do if
> > Jimmy Wales makes decisions opposite to
> > the opinion of the majority, as it could be
> > the case on the subject of
> > advertisement (Jimbo never decided clearly
> > against)?
> >To answer "Why don't you just fork?" is
> > slapping the donators in the face
> >Hear me well:  I do not have
> > anything against Jimbo, and I would have
> > been the first to vote for him in 2004,
> > and this, as long as he  would
> > have been ready to remain president.  That
> > would have been only a formality.  Today,
> > I would be more circumspect.  Of what is Jimbo
> > afraid exactly?  Some answered:
> > that a Board would precisely make
> > decisions opposite to the will of the
> > majority.  In addition to the fact that it
> > is in complete contradiction with the
> > concept even of democracy, the current
> > system does not put to us with the shelter.
> > Simply, this "privilege" is reserved to
> > only one person.  Personally, I intended to
> > rather strongly get involved in the activity of
> > the French association, but now, I am two
> > inches away from forgetting about the whole thing.
> >  That would be
> > already done if Wikipédia and the other
> > projects were not in GFDL, which means
> > that they do not belong to the Foundation.
> > Without hostility, I would like to strive to build
> > a collective work, and not to a
> > sort of monument to the glory of Jimmy
> > Wales, whatever his merits may be.
>