I do think though that the longer the promised statement takes, the more
it'll look like spin rather than truth. I agree that "rushed" is bad, but
"prompt" should still be a goal. I suppose it doesn't help that
potentially some of the folks at WMF Legal are relaxing on a proverbial
beach on a Christmas getaway, blissfully unaware that this is happening.
Cheers,
Craig
On 30 December 2015 at 16:34, Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I am not so ready to throw stones (: Perhaps because I
have had one-on-one
conversations with a number of people involved in this situation, and I
would like to believe that they are all good people.
Reports that are rushed can lead to mistaken conclusions. I'd rather get a
comprehensive report than a rushed one. I do expect an explanation, soon,
and I expect it will be provided with the kind of integrity and
professionalism that I would hope everyone involved in this situation has.
Pine
On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 10:20 PM, Comet styles <cometstyles(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Well the longer this drags on, the more
likelihood of us getting a
"false" answer ..it takes seconds to speak the truth, but days to
connive a lie..so i doubt we will get the 'truth' or atleast the full
truth..
On 12/30/15, Craig Franklin <cfranklin(a)halonetwork.net> wrote:
> Thanks Brad for spotting this and bringing it here, and also to Jimbo
for
> filling in a few more details.
>
> Just as an aside, my thinking is that this must have needed to be an
> emergency action. Because if the BoT has been mulling this over for
> awhile, it would be very poor governance to not have a strategy for how
> this would be communicated, and to only have WMF Legal on the case
after
> the fact. We already see this thread
filling up with a bunch of
> speculation that is unhelpful and unhealthy, not just for James but
also
> for the BoT and the movement in general. I
trust that there will be an
> explanation forthcoming, not only for why James has been removed in
this
way, but
also for why there was seemingly not any planning for how to
deal
> with the fallout of that decision.
>
> Cheers,
> Craig
>
> On 30 December 2015 at 03:47, Newyorkbrad <newyorkbrad(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>> I don't think it's been mentioned on this list that Jimmy Wales (one
>> of the board members) commented about this matter today on his En-WP
>> talkpage. Since I assume many people on this list don't follow that
>> page, I have copied his comment below:
>>
>> "Hi everyone. I couldn't possibly agree more that this should have
>> been announced with a full and clear and transparent and NPOV
>> explanation. Why didn't that happen? Because James chose to post
>> about it before we even concluded the meeting and before we had even
>> begun to discuss what an announcement should say. WMF legal has asked
>> the board to refrain from further comment until they've reviewed what
>> can be said - this is analogous in some ways to personnel issues.
>> Ideally, you would have heard about this a couple of days from now
>> when a mutual statement by James and the board had been agreed. For
>> now, please be patient. Accuracy is critically important here, and to
>> have 9 board members posting their own first impressions would be more
>> likely to give rise to confusions. -- Jimbo Wales (talk) 09:35, 29
>> December 2015 (UTC)"
>>
>> I'm not endorsing Jimbo's comment -- or the reverse -- as I frankly
>> find this whole situation strange and unfortunate. However, it seems
>> relevant and I thought people in this discussion might want to be
>> aware of it..
>>
>> I also agree that the information about the two new board members
>> should be circulated promptly.
>>
>> Newyorkbrad/IBM
>>
>> On 12/29/15, Steinsplitter Wiki <steinsplitter-wiki(a)live.com> wrote:
>> > The removal is not transparent at all.
>> >
>> > Apart from that James was community elected. A democracy words
>> > different.
>> >
>> > Very disappointing.
>> >
>> >> From: rupert.thurner(a)gmail.com
>> >> Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 16:51:14 +0100
>> >> To: wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> >> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 4:00 PM, MZMcBride <z(a)mzmcbride.com>
wrote:
>
>> > issue here. This is hardly unusual. Regarding the removal itself,
at
> >> > least
> >> > in the United States, it's fairly common for members of a body to
be
>> >> > able
>> >> > to remove/expel one of their own. The Wikimedia Foundation Board
of
>> >> > Trustees bylaws explicitly
allow for removal of a member, with or
>> >> > without
>> >> > cause. Unlike in older Board resolutions, there's a clear
public
>> >> > accounting of how each of the Board members voted (as opposed to
>> simple
>> >> > numeric totals). James posted that he will work with Patricio to
>> provide
>> >>
>> >> like others on this thread i think the WMF bylaws are broken in
this
>> >> respect. not legally broken,
but morally. i'd love to vote for a
>> >> trustee, and i'd love to reverse my decision in case a sufficient
>> >> party is not happy. if in this case james does not want to have a
>> >> public discussion he is free to resign. if the board thinks it
cannot
>> >> work with james anymore, and is
able to remove him without him
beeing
>
>> ok with it, without public discussion, then i do not find it
> >> transparent.
> >>
> >> best,
> >> rupert
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
>> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
--
Cometstyles
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>