-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Tony Sidaway stated for the record:
On 4/24/06, Molu loom91@yahoo.com wrote:
"The recent fuss over Office actions demonstrates amply that even quite well established administrators feel that they can challenge and disregard the interests of the Foundation." Unfortunately it demonstrates nothing even remotely resembling the dark senario you choose to paint. No party involved *has* challenged, let alone felt entitled to challenge, the interests of the foundation.
To be specific, Geni removed office protection from an article about a month ago without consulting Danny, and The Epopt, an arbitrator, has recently removed a block on an another editor imposed by Danny. I don't need to paint any dark scenarios, they're already here. Moreover the attacks on Office protection continue.
To be clear as well as specific, I objected to the block, not article protection under the OFFICE policy. I fully support OFFICE as a mechanism to protect the Foundation's interests.
- -- Sean Barrett | Where there's a will, I want to be in it. sean@epoptic.org |