Please find herewith a revised translation for better understanding.
I posted the following text: "Wikimedia
Foundation: the worm in the fruit? At the
time of the constituent assembly of the French
association Wikimedia France, the subject came up
that Jimmy Wales and Wikimedia
Foundation would refuse the right to use
the trademarks which it held (Wikimedia,
Wikipedia, Wktionary, Wikibooks...) if
the Foundation did not have a right of veto
(the term was debated) on the decisions
that the French foundation would make.
At the same time, during the creation of
Wikimedia Foundation, Jimmy Wales imposed 3
seats out of 5, and reserved himself the seat of
president, the 2 seats remaining being
provided by election (what led to 4
anglophone members out of 5). This
way of doing things was not to be renewed, and a
really democratic election was to take
place this year (it is what had been known
as at the time). One learns now that Jimmy
Wales intends to continue to reserve himself the
seat of president, with probably a right of
veto on the decisions. A less democratic process
appears difficult. The one year delay
was thus only one means of drowning fish.
This way of doing things should make us ask ourselves
certain number of questions:
* What are these foundations used ?
* Don't donators have a right to say something on
the use that is made of the money they gave?
* Isn't it deceiving people to make
believe that the foundation takes care of the
interests of Wikipedia, whereas it is only
a buttocks-organization, without any real
capacity of decision?
* Isnt it deceiving to give the appearance of democracy
when it is not at all democratic?
* What will the community do if
Jimmy Wales makes decisions opposite to
the opinion of the majority, as it could be
the case on the subject of
advertisement (Jimbo never decided clearly
against)?
To answer "Why don't you just fork?" is
slapping the donators in the face
Hear me well: I do not have
anything against Jimbo, and I would have
been the first to vote for him in 2004,
and this, as long as he would
have been ready to remain president. That
would have been only a formality. Today,
I would be more circumspect. Of what is Jimbo
afraid exactly? Some answered:
that a Board would precisely make
decisions opposite to the will of the
majority. In addition to the fact that it
is in complete contradiction with the
concept even of democracy, the current
system does not put to us with the shelter.
Simply, this "privilege" is reserved to
only one person. Personally, I intended to
rather strongly get involved in the activity of
the French association, but now, I am two
inches away from forgetting about the whole thing.
That would be
already done if Wikipédia and the other
projects were not in GFDL, which means
that they do not belong to the Foundation.
Without hostility, I would like to strive to build
a collective work, and not to a
sort of monument to the glory of Jimmy
Wales, whatever his merits may be.