Hoi, You have not been paying attention have you? As the WMF has a non-disclosure agreement, it was not at liberty to do such a thing. It is bad enough that Carolyn has to go through all this. It is bad enough that people cannot get it into their head that people are damaged in this way. It is not a zero sum game, people hurt as a consequence.
With Jimmy personally guaranteeing that there will be no ill effects for our precious organisation. With people imploring us to stop bitching because the pertinent details cannot and will not be made available you cannot stop. Why, what is your rationale to go on? What do you hope to achieve? Yes, this is a rhetorical question !
I am truly sorry for Carolyn, she worked hard when she worked for us. At the time I was told that it made a difference to have her. Now, with her sadly being in this stark spot light, I wish her well and hope that this episode will soon move into the obscurity where it belongs.
Thanks, GerardM
On Dec 15, 2007 2:04 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
We did not have the information in the Register article until they actually ran the article. I was stunned when I read it. Therefore, it was impossible for us to "break the story" ourselves.
They must have given you a general idea of the story when they were interviewing Mike. You can't ask "Were you aware of Mrs. Doran's criminal record?" without revealing the fact that she has a criminal record... As soon as Mike was asked that question the foundation should have done their own investigation and then broken the story. It would have taken a couple of hours to get enough information together to spoil The Register's scoop.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l