[Foundation-l] Steward elections

[Florence Devouard]

Yeah...
Well, I am happy if we consider Jimbo a steward for life, out of the 
sake of argument that he is the founder of Wikipedia, blablabla

But please drop the argument that he is part of the group of Wikimedians 
which needs the steward tech tool. He does not need that tool and I am 
not even sure he ever used it (or even know how to use it).
Let's be serious here :-)

Ant

Comet styles wrote:
> Jimbo,Brion Vibber, RobChurch, Kate and Tom Starling are exempted from
> confirmation since they are part of the group of wikimedians with a
> bigger task of improving wikimedia and they would need the tools from
> time to time and not always and its wiser to let them keep it and they
> may not use it rather then to take it away from them and they wont be
> able to use it when and if they need it... (O_o)
> 
> On Nov 13, 2007 10:07 AM, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12/11/2007, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 12/11/2007, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 12/11/2007, John Reaves <johnreaveswp at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Stewards/elections_2007#Confirmations__.28of_identity_and_of_existing_stewards.29
>>>> So despite breaking what is described as "very strong policy for
>>>> stewards" jimbo's position as a meta steward is not open to question?
>>>
>>> I don't expect "no, and stop being querulous" will stop you being
>>> querulous on this point.
>> As and until we Jimbo make meaningfully accountable to someone or he
>> stops acting outside accepted community norms no.
>>
>>
>> --
>> geni
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
> 
> 
>