Steven Walling wrote:
This seems to be pretty old hat. The disgusting part of the Register's story is that it relies more on alluding to things without evidence. There's no evidence that she was fired or resigned because of the Foundation finding out about her record. But the Register sure works hard to make it look plausible. And next they so blatantly hint that the audit has been postponed due to her, again without any credible evidence.
It looks like this may be yet another situation where a lack of openness by Wikipedia/Wikimedia is going to result in a vaccum into which all manner of suspicion can be easily projected. Kelly Martin noticed an odd silence surrounding Doran's departure back in July, http://nonbovine-ruminations.blogspot.com/2007/07/is-this-transparency.html even if none of these allegations are actually true I suspect this apparent secrecy is going to give the story plenty of legs.
I hope this all gets clarified as quickly and as publicly as possible.