On 19 Jan 2020, at 08:54:12, geni
On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 at 00:50, Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
There are ways that Wikimedia rebranding consultations could be done
collaboratively, politely, and with careful stewardship of donor's money.
This is not one of them.
Eh questionable. The community is difficult to engage at the best of
times and tends to be reflexively conservative about such things. It
may well be that it is impossible to get any meaningful agreement on
I think that it's time for some people in WMF
to move on.
This kind of thing has happened from time to time despite significant
staff turnover over the years. Probably just a natural function of
certain organisations. All we can really do is try and limit the
but I've had enough of poor coordination,
Unavoidable from time to time since there is too much going on for any
one person to keep track of.
questionable financial decisions,
Again a function of size. It would frankly be concerning if every
editor agreed with every financial decisions. There is also the long
standing problem of balancing the risk of wasting money with the risk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org