Jimmy,
I have a ridiculous amount of respect for you and what you have accomplished. I have watched from afar (I was living a lot in other countries) as this radical experiment in trust *exploded* on to the world. It blew my mind. And some of the early rules that were set were nothing short of genius (e.g. NPOV, AGF and due weight come to mind). It was an ideal experiment: an open frontier with simple, limited rule sets. And the icing on the cake is that "citation needed" ended up not just influencing how I thought about an encyclopedic text, but how I thought about discussing ideas.
So it is from that genuine respect base that I disagree with you on this particular point:
"> I would love to know whether you supported Lila Tretikov's departure. It is
clear that she did not up and resign on her own, and I would like to know if you were one of the folks who thought her departure would be
beneficial,
or if you preferred she "weather the storm," so to speak.
I supported it with sadness. The whole thing is a sad train wreck."
I do not think this is a train wreck. I think this is one of the hottest moments since this genius encyclopedia exploded onto the world.
People are engaged.
Rock on, /a
On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:59 AM, Anna Stillwell astillwell@wikimedia.org wrote:
"I don't think what Anna described requires "a build-out" of HR. What I am reading is a description of what HR should *already be*, and, crucially, *once used to be*."
You're exactly right, Asaf. That's what I meant. Thank you for the clarification.
/a
On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Asaf Bartov abartov@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:37 AM, phoebe ayers phoebe.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Anna Stillwell astillwell@wikimedia.org wrote:
Before adding another layer of process and reporting and complexity structurally, we should more likely try to renew the heart of HR and
allow
them to work with Legal in partnership as they had done so well
throughout
our entire history.
Fair, and I certainly appreciate this. To be clear my idea is only for a temporary position -- only a few months at most, really -- and could certainly happen concurrently with such a build-out of HR.
I don't think what Anna described requires "a build-out" of HR. What I am reading is a description of what HR should *already be*, and, crucially, *once used to be*.
I second Anna (who, by the way, *is* one of those "people other people turn to", or "unappointed toxin handlers" mentioned) in everything she said. If the board would choose to pay attention, it would find new behaviors in HR that veer away from our values, and that occasionally violate WMF's own stated policies. (one quick example: formally censuring an employee [not me] without their direct manager present, or even informed.)
I encourage looking into this, and doing whatever is necessary to "renew the heart of HR".
A. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- Anna Stillwell Major Gifts Officer Wikimedia Foundation 415.806.1536 *www.wikimediafoundation.org http://www.wikimediafoundation.org*