Being bold has different implications when you're at the leadership of
a multi million dollar nonprofit organization, rather than trying to
make a controversial edit to an article. When you make an edit to an
article, it can be reverted. But bold changes like this by the board
cannot be so easily undone, if the damage from them can even be undone
at all, and the "bold, revert, discuss, assume good faith" argument
does not apply here.
But apparently, assuming good faith does not apply to people who
criticize the critics either.
-Dan
On Apr 29, 2008, at 4:31 AM, Bryan Tong Minh wrote:
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 12:19 AM, George Herbert
<george.herbert(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Why has this been simmering off in the wings? What are people
actually upset about?
People are upset they are not consulted and start seeing conspiracies
behind it. Apparently "being bold" and "assume good faith" does not
apply towards the board...
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l