Michelle
Would you let us know how much of the donors' money will be spent on this legal brief, either directly or in the costs of staff time, please? It would also be of interest to know why you felt that the input of the WMF to this brief was essential given that there are 90 other organisations involved?
"Rogol"
On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Mike Godwin mnemonic@gmail.com wrote:
Yair Rand writes:
I find it difficult to believe that this situation is so critical and urgent that an RfC in advance was impossible, so if it does fall
under
that section, the policy was yet again violated.
I don't find it difficult at all to believe time was of the essence, but, then, I'm an attorney who's worked for many years on collaborative efforts, including but not limited to legal action.
I grant, of course, that your experience with doing legal and public-policy assessments may be different. But if your view is that either the Board of Trustees or WMF staff cannot be trusted to make these assessments, then I urge you to explain in more depth why you think this is so.
My own experience has been that quite often the Board or the WMF staff have to make quick decisions, especially when the timeline for decision-making is not in WMF's control. Certainly I often was called upon to make decisions on behalf of WMF and the Wikimedia movement on timelines that made consultation with Wikimedia-l or with committees and affiliated organizations unworkable. I hope you don't find that difficult to believe.
Please assume good faith.
Best,
--Mike
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l 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