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(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Pete Forsyth
<peteforsyth(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Nathan
<nawrich(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>