reflection(a)gmail.com wrote:
I have taken up the /Staff section of of the grant
application.
Having consulted with others the best way to do this seems to be for
anyone willing to help with the grant to send a résumé to
reflection(a)gmail.com. I will compile them. Please tailor your
experiences/education towards relevancy to WikiMedia.
We are especially interested in résumés from developers and
bureaucrats, but all are necessarily welcome. All Board members are
asked to submit. In addition, we need as many people as possible to
answer the following questions. Please do not reply to the mailing
list, but to reflection(a)gmail.com This will prevent clutter and will
maintain your privacy/anonymity.
1) What is your full name and nickname? (Include a URL to your user page).
2) Describe your duties at Wikipedia and qualifications for those
duties. If you have a title what is your title, and how long have you
held it.
3) Indicate the amount of time that you, the projects staff,
anticipate committing to the project on a monthly basis (hours), and
for how many months, years.
If the author of this email is not willing to even identify themselves
to us, I don't see why any of us would want to send them a résumé. Also,
I can't understand why résumés from bureaucrats would be requested in
this context.
Note that the Staff section of the grant page was only just made into a
subpage by an IP address. It has since been edited only by that same IP
address and a user named Alterego (except for one minor edit by
Eloquence). The username, plus Alterego's extremely short contribution
history on Meta and en:, sets off all my sockpuppet alerts. In fact, my
initial impulse is to attribute this to Bird, given that user's peculiar
interest in "exposing" Wikipedia as a front for who knows what. No doubt
Bird could concoct all kinds of conspiracy theories out of our
collective résumés.
If the request is legitimate, and I'm the one spinning conspiracy
theories, then two (actually, three) requests. One, could you please
tell us who you really are? Two, would somebody who's a little more "in
charge" of the grant process, like Danny or one of the board members,
confirm that soliciting this information is actually necessary and
appropriate at this time? Finally, when you reply to a digest version of
this list, please do not include the entire digest in your reply. Thank you.
--Michael Snow