On 7/17/07, Titoxd@Wikimedia titoxd.wikimedia@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm. Now *why* exactly did they say that? I'm sure that they didn't say it just because they felt like it, but rather, that there were reasons behind that statement. If those reasons are made public (as much as it is permitted by common sense, of course), then we would know why adding a restriction for [ex-]employees has its benefits.
Well, the first thing would be to ask them to clarify whether they indeed meant current *and* former employees, or merely current employees.
I think the argument for not allowing concurrent employment and trusteeship is indeed strong, and definitely the case for striving to make that explicit is well founded.
-- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]