Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
Whether or not you have a point about that position
having been badly
considered or having a been a waste of money -- and I'd be inclined to
think that it was at least a little of both -- you've squarely crossed
the line between "asking legitimate questions" and "pointless
harassment".
Yes, think of the employees! How dare you ask very acute questions! How
dare you ask any questions at all! It's harassment, and it's even worse
than that! It's pointless harassment!
Even if Timothy has been highly disruptive rather than
just apparently
very inefficient (which he wasn't), or if it has been donors' money that
had been spent (which it wasn't), or if you had /actually/ been
appointed to speak for "the number one stakeholder in our projects"
(which you haven't); it wouldn't justify your continuing harangue when
you have been clearly told that no further substantive information would
come until Sue returns next week.
It was donors' money that was spent on this position, Marc. And if you
can point me to where Russavia said he was speaking of behalf of the
community, and not on behalf of himself, it would be appreciated.
Otherwise, if you think community members can only speak their mind if
they have been appointed by the rest of the Wikimedia contributors, this
needs to be added to our mailing list guidelines. Or maybe we should get
rid of the mailing lists altogether to avoid such misunderstandings in
the future.
You've made your point and raised the issue, and
now the information for
informed judgment is being published. How about you let the /rest/ of
the community examine it and reach its own conclusions?
How about you stop telling people what to do? You're not Russavia's
boss, so just stop, and do it fast. Thanks.
Tomasz