On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 6:23 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 May 2010 07:30, Samuel J Klein sj@wikimedia.org wrote:
Perish the thought. The Board is not controlling content - I would oppose any Board action that did so.
<
The Board does not support this - although individuals may - it is not the role of the Board or the Foundation to get involved with project policy or content discussions.
The board members that have bothered speaking up have so far supported it. Ting has expressly endorsed Board control over project content.
They are still speaking as individuals - and were mainly commenting on whether they thought it was appropriate for Jimmy to spur a policy discussion as a community member. Please do not confuse personal opinions - including my own - for a stance of the Board.
Our mandate as a Board explicitly precludes meddling in Project policy, community disputes, and the like. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_member
And the Board has always taken care in its official statements not to suggest it is directing project policy or content, except where -- as with the 2007 licensing policy -- this is the explicit intent, and the policy change crafted after extensive discussion with the Projects.
As to a way forward -- it is (as ever) up to the Commons community to work out what its policies are to be, with Jimmy if they are willing. I encourage those who feel strongly about these issues to engage directly in discussions there.
The overriding question will be the editorial role of the board.
The Board has no editorial role, on Commons or on any other Project, unless you consider high-level goal-setting and prioritization ( like http://j.mp/wmfblp ) editorial.
SJ