Hi,
I'm puzzled of those emails. Especially melting organisational discussions and private issues.
Who sleeps with whom is of no importance actually. What you seem to describe is someone using a personal relationship with a leader of our movement to push forward its POV.
This asks for an organisational discussion, not a personnal one. What happens in someone's private life is private.
If you believe that we're facing a leadership issue, as a movement, please say so.
Now, and this is not a first, you're hinting that there are issues on the english Wikipedia following last weeks wikimedia-l discussions. Fair enough, but what ARE those issues? (Austin asked the question I failed to find a clear answer sadly.)
From my point of view, french wikimedian, all I saw is some drama around
specific topics that stopped days ago. As far as I know, the crisis isn't going further than that. And what your email, sofar, is doing, is generating fruitless discussions.
Hinting someone dumping someone else is NOT an organisational solution.
From my culture and my values it's not only rude and violent, but way over
the line.
So if you want to solve the issue wp:en, one of many projects if I dare remind you, is facing could you please : * Recap the situation * Provide links to the discussions you mention * Provide organisational solutions
Then, we, the larger community you reach out to through that email, will be able to assess the situation and perhaps help you get through this.
Best,
-- Christophe
On 15 June 2014 19:49, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
No, I have not recapped the whole situation. What I think is appropriate
is
that we find a way to bring the situation to a calm conclusion of some kind. I think the ED has far more options at her disposal than anybody else, as well as a fair amount of responsibility for it happening in the first place, but to date hasn't done anything about it. I think it's appropriate to voice concerns about a situation that appears to be
having a
strong impact on the existing social structure of Wikipedia.
Finger-wagging about minor gossip is a distraction from the important dynamics.
-Pete _________________________________
You brought this nasty, hurtful gossip to a much larger stage. Wikimedia-L is a global list with many subscribers, including Wikimedia employees, Lila and Wil themselves, journalists and interested observers. Whether the rumors and deeply inappropriate commentary existed elsewhere is irrelevant to the fact that you made it much more widely known. You seem unable to understand how this kind of thing can effect real, living people with feelings. You also seem oblivious to the sexist nature of the gossip itself.
Whatever you think of Wil and Lila and Wil's role so far (and, honestly, what you think is well known since you posted your insulting comments about Lila to this list), nothing justifies exacerbating the situation by republishing hateful gossip. You seem to think the core issue, whatever it is now (Wil's effect on Lila's reputation? On her effectiveness in her job? On the reputation of WMF in general?), deserves more discussion on this list. Yet you offer no evidence of this, or even reasoning in support of it. The gossip jabs are incidental, and seem calibrated to generate just the sort of drama you claim to disdain. Feel free to try again - start a new thread, explain what you think the actual problem is, limit yourself to discussion of that problem, and we'll see what happens. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe