Have been enjoying discussions on the subject matter. I wish we can understand that we
are laying a precedent that would be used to judge you and I tomorrow.
Yes, the board could be right by the decision taking against James . More so , the
communities could be right by their reactions against the decision.
In light of these two positions, we need to look at the substances surrounding the issue
at hand, thus:
1. What is James's offence
2. Is the offense enough for a sack
3. Is the board answerable to the communities in term of their decisions and activities.
4. How current is the bylaw being used by the board
5 . Who makes the law.
The more the above mentioned questions remain unanswered, the more the argument. Mind you,
a very tiny smoke if not quenched will definitely lead to a wildfire.
Lastly, If we could answer these golden questions, perhaps we could be on the way to
resolve the matter at hand.
WR.
Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
Original Message
From: Gnangarra
Sent: Saturday, January 2, 2016 10:56 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Reply To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board
The sky isnt falling <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henny_Penny> yes it
wasnt optimally handled and yes it caught the community by surprise but
lets be careful here. We cant sit back and enjoy the holiday season while
expecting everyone else to be dropping everything and running into to the
office to write a full explanation while threaten to bring the the
projects(their livelyhoods) crashing down around their ears.
Lets just take a collective breath and wait until people start returning
next week to sort out the mess created, let them provide better information
and move forward better informed
On 2 January 2016 at 17:44, Yaroslav M. Blanter <putevod(a)mccme.ru> wrote:
On 2016-01-02 09:37, Peter Southwood wrote:
Just as you say.
No threat to WMF if they don’t care about retaining the editing community.
If all else fails thy could just sell advertising
Cheers,
Peter
This is an interesting theoretical discussion, and I criticized WMF in the
past on a number of occasions, but I feel necessary to emphasize that there
is not a slightest indication at this time that they do not care about
retaining the community. At most, we have indications that they did not
handle some issues in sub-optimal way. The probability that Wikipedia and
sister projects will collapse in say ten years because some novel technical
means become available and we do not manage to respond properly is in my
opinion a billion times higher than that we will collapse because BoT or
WMF staff function sub-optimally in their daily communications with the
community. Let us discuss real things and not what happens if Martians come
to enslave us.
Cheers
Yaroslav
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
--
GN.
President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU:
http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery:
http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>