[Foundation-l] Questions about new Fellow

[whothis]

On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 11:56 PM, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:

> 2011/1/20 whothis <whothith at gmail.com>:
> > I hope others reading this realize the implication of your appointment. I
> > had no idea who you were before this, and still don't
>
> I had no idea who you were before this. Then I checked my mail
> archives and saw that the only other thread you've been engaged in was
> a different set of accusations about the existence of a cabal and the
> impropriety thereof.
>

Thats a fair assessment, let me first say that I respect your opinion to a
certain degree Erik. But as an unknown poster on this list, I have the exact
same qualification as Mr. Prabhala does, perhaps even more, the only
difference is I am not on the Advisory Board. Second, Let me refresh your
memory I posted on a thread a while ago, complaining about the Movement
roles "steering committee", composed of 5 people from the chapter committee,
a board member and an employee. I made a comment in passing that add Achal
or Florence to the mix and you have the Advisory Board Cabal. Maybe I was
the only one who saw a pattern.


>
> This is not a constructive conversation, because it confuses and
> conflates a bunch of very complex issues (questions of NPO governance
> and ethics, which you clearly have a very limited understanding of,
> vs. questions of effective and transparent operations, vs. community
> participation, etc.), and has from the beginning taken the tone of
> prosecutorial questioning. If you're interested in having a
> constructive conversation e.g. about the grants process and the
> fellowships program without attacking individuals, I'll be happy to
> join it, here or on Meta.
>

Clearly, without even knowing who I am, you can easily write me off as
someone with a very limited understanding of NPO governance and ethics. That
is one thing you are apparently sure about in all of this, I would say
something about your own Hubris but I think that's just the way it is.
Anyway, I didn't raise the questions, the other person did, I made the point
about a possible appearance of impropriety and was planning on fading away
until the jibe about "Pranayama" and the patronizing tone. I don't care for
his grant or "fellowship", he might as well be researching farts for all I
care, researchers and consultants come and go, but Advisory Board members
they are forever.

I unfortunately, have a life to live and bills to pay instead of engaging in
a "constructive" and drawn-out conversation, we can't all be lifetime
appointed Advisory Board members. Apologies if it got too personal, I took
offense to one of the statements earlier and had to resort to polemics.


Kind Regards


Elizabeth