On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 6:23 AM, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 9 May 2010 07:30, Samuel J Klein
<sj(a)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