Ola, cool down both of you.
We like and respect both of you, and Gerard as well.
Now, Sabine. As long as a discussion occurs privately, you may not know
there was ever private discussion. It is only when such discussions
occur publicly that everyone suddenly discovers things (and complain
things should be discussed privately first).
Fact is that these discussions have occured privately, then
semi-privately on irc.
Fact is that other people than Waerth have complained about Gerard being
often a bit overbearing, but are not willing to say it aloud.
Fact is it is not only about Kennisnet, but also about the Dutch
On the other hand, it is most unfortunately frequent that those being
very very bold are also very very criticized by others... for being
bold, for going to quickly etc... Some people are bold and quick, but
often take no time to listen to others and act in a consensual way.
Others are more hesitant, slow, more respectful, but listen more than
they act, so do far less.
We need all types. If only the first bold type, wikipedia would be a
battlefield. If only the second type, few things would get done. So it
might be good that we have Gerard being bold (and sometimes upsetting
people) and Waerth being openly critical of Gerard actions.
The only things that really is important, is that all voices are heard
in the end... and currently, as an observer of the past months, I fear
it is not so clear that all voices were heard and all opinions taken
Waerth is part of our community, just as is Gerard or you, or other
dissenters. I do not think we should say to anyone part of the community
to shut up. Maybe to talk differently, maybe to act differently, but
not to shut up.
And in any cases, distress is obvious, I do not think we should dismiss
it. And I say this not only because of Waerth email (as usual, very
impetuous as Waerth always is), but also because of other voices I have
heard (less impetuous, but critical as well).
I have unfortunately no idea what we could do at this point... :-(
Maybe talking about it publicly if people have the willingness to do so
? (without fear)
Ciao to both of you.
Walter van Kalken a écrit:
Sabine Cretella wrote:
Did you ever hear about conditions in contracts?
about written and
oral agreements? do you know why normally agreements
..... skip .....
words considering the kind of language and
espression you are used to use.
You have never really had to deal with gerard extensively in him
representing your project. I am not the only one with these feelings. I
am the only one currently opening about it.
Please just shut up now and if you have requests
make them in a
written mail and with a clean language.
Demands? this is plain xxxx (censored words) . All communications I had
sofar with you Sabine are through mail so I do not see how that would
change it is not as if I talked with you on IRC or something else.
Otherwise no-one will ever read your mails
anymore I suppose.
That would only make the situation more difficult wouldn't it? My
situation and feeling would be unanswered which would mean it wouldn't
be solved, which would mean I would get more pissed off. These emails
would have never been send in the first place if Gerard would have
communicated, I have quite a couple of editors on nl: who feel the same,
Gerard doesn't communicate. If I was the only one .... I would be a
fool, but I am not.
I just had a glance at your last e-mail-opera -
the only thing you are
trying to do is to miscredit and not to figure out things - a
behaviour that is not ammissible to me (and maybe also to others).
Not to figure out things? I have been trying to do that for months and
if the subject in question is either not answering or talking around the
subject in order to try and avoid having to give an answer it is
becoming really difficult isn't it.
And don't make me go further - my mails can
even be more kind than
Be my guest.
Now fist of all I want
a) an excuse to all contributors of the wikimedia projects
I am sorry? You want me to publicly humiliate myself because you and
Gerard share the same ideas and work together intimately?
an then it is considerable that
b) you send in a "clean and gentle" mail about what you think and want
(and I mean this)
It was send, I do not like mangling my words, I say them straight as I
c) without any aggressive tone
My mails are never meant aggressively.
d) you go and learn what the word discussion means
I know what it means, part of it involves the other party actually
answering your questions.
Otherwise: consider your mails not to be read
anymore (there's a nice
function in any e-mail softare - so called filters and a neat place
for undesired mails: the trash-bin)
I could become sarcastic here.
I suppose I understood the why of such a
behaviour - and this has
nothing to do with the projects itself, but with ego.
Great psychological insight, any more descriptions of my character?
What I found out is that you are a stweard,
right? (as you can see, I
do my homework) and as such this behaviour is really something
unbelievable and unforgivable.
Yes and you are on Italian wiktionary mainly. A steward is a technical
function only. It is not a representative function. I am not abusing it
in away, nor am I refusing to fullfill anyone's request. The function
description of being a steward doesn't say anywhere about me having to
be politically correct nor to have to forfeit my own opinion. If you do
not want a person who says what he beliefs in and stands by it, than
simply do not vote for me.
(and please note: I do not sign this mail with "Sabine" as usually -
and I don't use "ciao" - this means this mail has a very definite
Well have a good day to