Erik Moeller wrote:

The point of language is to communicate. When we use language, we should use the one which allows us to communicate best.

Yes, but which one is that, the language in which the writer (or speaker) can best express themselves, or the language that can best be understood by the audience? It's a judgment call in each instance, depending on the writer, the audience, and the subject matter. I'm content to trust participants on the mailing list to make those judgments for themselves.

If a plausible argument can be made that in this instance, and in others, French was a better way to communicate than English, then I'm open to hearing it.

Readily. In this instance, since posts in French are unusual, I think a reasonable case can be made that writing in French actually drew more attention than writing in English. That helped accomplish the two things my post addressed - promoting the use of foundation-l as the mailing list for Wikimedia-wide projects, and highlighting the fact that Jimbo wasn't receiving messages from this mailing list. I think both situations have significantly improved.

It seems to me that the much more realistic explanation is that some people prefer to switch to a language which they think other people won't understand when they want to make comments which they don't want other people to read.

Since, as has been pointed out several times, this is a public list, and various participants are able to provide translations or use machine translators, it seems foolish to me for anyone to think that you can make any comments here that some other person won't be able to read or understand.

I would appreciate it if we could all agree to make our conversations as open as possible.

Of course. That's why I'm willing to translate my statement (if anybody is still wondering what I said), and why I'm also willing to communicate in other languages.

--Michael Snow