Ok, first I will agree that Kelly's post was one of the best and most concise of this year. But then let me also applaud Delphine's followup, particularly this bit here:
Delphine Ménard wrote:
We've seen that the "Foundation" doing anything invariably leads to mild or fierce accusations of "the Foundation" wanting to take over, rule and what not. Well, maybe if *we* the community, proposed the organisation (the Foundation) with a comprehensive way to go about this, showing that *we* the community, have understood what's at stake on an organisational level, things could change for the better.
One of the most worrying trends I have seen is a tendency for people to think of "the Foundation" as being completely apart from "the Community". That way lies madness, I think.
--Jimbo