Hello,
First, I would like to thank those people who have contacted me privately, expressing concern about the events of the past few days. I truly value your friendship and support.
That said, at present, I am unwilling to discuss the reasons for my resignation from the WMF office team. I plan on remaining an active editor on various projects, as I have always been, even before I began working for WMF. To ensure that there are no misunderstandings or claims of an abuse of power, I ask that all admin status on the various projects be revoked. If I feel I can help as an admin, I will ask to be reelected by the normal process. I look forward to this opportunity to reenter the community as a new user and to share in the building of free knowledge. I would also like to announce that I plan on running for the Board of Trustees in the June elections for the seats currently held by Kat, Oscar, and Erik. At that time, I will make known my position on how the Wikimedia Foundation should operate, and what mistakes I perceive are being made at present. So let's leave the gossip and second-guessing behind us and get on with the real task at hand--building the largest and most reliable repository of knowledge ever created. Danny
************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
Danny,
I wish you the very best in your future endeavors. Your contributions to the Foundation and all of the projects in general stand on their own merit. You have a lot to be proud of, and have left a lasting mark in the hearts of all of us that your life has touched.
Love ya,
Jeff
daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
Hello,
First, I would like to thank those people who have contacted me privately, expressing concern about the events of the past few days. I truly value your friendship and support.
That said, at present, I am unwilling to discuss the reasons for my resignation from the WMF office team. I plan on remaining an active editor on various projects, as I have always been, even before I began working for WMF. To ensure that there are no misunderstandings or claims of an abuse of power, I ask that all admin status on the various projects be revoked. If I feel I can help as an admin, I will ask to be reelected by the normal process. I look forward to this opportunity to reenter the community as a new user and to share in the building of free knowledge. I would also like to announce that I plan on running for the Board of Trustees in the June elections for the seats currently held by Kat, Oscar, and Erik. At that time, I will make known my position on how the Wikimedia Foundation should operate, and what mistakes I perceive are being made at present. So let's leave the gossip and second-guessing behind us and get on with the real task at hand--building the largest and most reliable repository of knowledge ever created. Danny
************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 22/03/07, daniwo59@aol.com daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
To ensure that there are no misunderstandings or claims of an abuse of power, I ask that all admin status on the various projects be revoked. If I feel I can help as an admin, I will ask to be reelected by the normal process. I look forward to this opportunity to reenter the community as a new user and to share in the building of free knowledge.
You were elected as an admin to en:wp in the normal manner, surely it wouldn't be crossing the streams to keep that.
- d.
David Gerard wrote:
On 22/03/07, daniwo59@aol.com daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
To ensure that there are no misunderstandings or claims of an abuse of power, I ask that all admin status on the various projects be revoked. If I feel I can help as an admin, I will ask to be reelected by the normal process. I look forward to this opportunity to reenter the community as a new user and to share in the building of free knowledge.
You were elected as an admin to en:wp in the normal manner, surely it wouldn't be crossing the streams to keep that.
- d.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
well, I don't *really* know you..but i always like to welcome people willing to enhance wp..so welcome to the real work ahead :P
I'm sorry to hear this.
-Yonatan
On 3/22/07, Mohamed Magdy mohamed.m.k@gmail.com wrote:
David Gerard wrote:
On 22/03/07, daniwo59@aol.com daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
To ensure that there are no misunderstandings or claims of an abuse of
power, I ask
that all admin status on the various projects be revoked. If I feel I
can
help as an admin, I will ask to be reelected by the normal process. I
look
forward to this opportunity to reenter the community as a new user and
to share
in the building of free knowledge.
You were elected as an admin to en:wp in the normal manner, surely it wouldn't be crossing the streams to keep that.
- d.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
well, I don't *really* know you..but i always like to welcome people willing to enhance wp..so welcome to the real work ahead :P
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
Hello,
First, I would like to thank those people who have contacted me privately, expressing concern about the events of the past few days. I truly value your friendship and support.
That said, at present, I am unwilling to discuss the reasons for my resignation from the WMF office team. I plan on remaining an active editor on various projects, as I have always been, even before I began working for WMF. To ensure that there are no misunderstandings or claims of an abuse of power, I ask that all admin status on the various projects be revoked.
I hope that this will not prevent us from meeting again in Taipei.
Ray
On 3/22/07, daniwo59@aol.com daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
That said, at present, I am unwilling to discuss the reasons for my resignation from the WMF office team
[snip]
At that time, I will make known my position on how the Wikimedia Foundation should operate, and what mistakes I perceive are being made at present.
The way I read this the reasons for your resignations from the WMF office team are related to mistakes you perceive as being made at present. If not, please clearify. If yes, please elaborate now, not during your election-campaign.
Greetings and have fun Mathias
On 3/22/07, Mathias Schindler mathias.schindler@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/22/07, daniwo59@aol.com daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
That said, at present, I am unwilling to discuss the reasons for my resignation from the WMF office team
[snip]
At that time, I will make known my position on how the Wikimedia Foundation should operate, and what mistakes I perceive are being made at present.
The way I read this the reasons for your resignations from the WMF office team are related to mistakes you perceive as being made at present. If not, please clearify. If yes, please elaborate now, not during your election-campaign.
Greetings and have fun Mathias
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Huh? He's free to resign. He's not forced to give an explanation to anyone who asks.
He's specifically said he doesn't want to discuss his reasons *at the moment*, so please stop demanding so.
Huh? He's free to resign. He's not forced to give an explanation to anyone who asks.
It sounds like he's blaming the board for his resignation but isn't saying why. Doesn't seem fair on the board to me... while they probably know the reasons, they can't defend themselves if he doesn't make the reasons public.
On 3/22/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Huh? He's free to resign. He's not forced to give an explanation to anyone who asks.
It sounds like he's blaming the board for his resignation but isn't saying why. Doesn't seem fair on the board to me... while they probably know the reasons, they can't defend themselves if he doesn't make the reasons public.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
That's why rumouring is bad. "It sounds" ... no, that's just your perception. He stated that he thinks some things can be done in a better way. But he's not blaking the board on his resignation, and probably the board knows already the reasons.
You say "The Board can't defend themselves..." , well fi the Board needs the reasons, they can ask (and probably have) Danny in privte. No need to vent such information in public.
You and I aren't entitled to demand an explanation and to know every small detail. It's between Danny and the Foundation.
You say "The Board can't defend themselves..." , well fi the Board needs the reasons, they can ask (and probably have) Danny in privte. No need to vent such information in public.
You can't defend yourself in private when you are accused in public.
Whether he meant it to sound like he was blaming them or not, that's the way it came across to me, and I expect plenty of other people.
On 3/22/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
You say "The Board can't defend themselves..." , well fi the Board needs the reasons, they can ask (and probably have) Danny in privte. No need to vent such information in public.
You can't defend yourself in private when you are accused in public.
Whether he meant it to sound like he was blaming them or not, that's the way it came across to me, and I expect plenty of other people.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
The Foundation can defend itself if it chooses to and if the situation arises. Just because you and other think the Foundation is attacked, it doesn't become true.
On 3/22/07, Pedro Sanchez pdsanchez@gmail.com wrote:
You and I aren't entitled to demand an explanation and to know every small detail. It's between Danny and the Foundation.
It is, however, unreasonable not to expect there to be curiosity and no small degree of consternation when two longtime key employees announce their departures over a couple of days.
It's one thing to say (correctly) that Danny, Brad, and the Board have a right to keep the respective personel matter details private.
However, if there are substantiative policy disagreements at stake, I for one remain rather confused as to what they are and their nature, and we are all entitled to an explanation of those types of matters.
I don't know if there is any substantiative policy disagreement, or if it's just personalities, or individual choice. If it is a substantiative policy issue, we don't need to find out RIGHT NOW, but it would be fair to ask if there is such a thing, and over what timeframe the parties will feel comfortable talking about it.
On 3/22/07, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/22/07, Pedro Sanchez pdsanchez@gmail.com wrote:
You and I aren't entitled to demand an explanation and to know every small detail. It's between Danny and the Foundation.
It is, however, unreasonable not to expect there to be curiosity and no small degree of consternation when two longtime key employees announce their departures over a couple of days.
It's one thing to say (correctly) that Danny, Brad, and the Board have a right to keep the respective personel matter details private.
However, if there are substantiative policy disagreements at stake, I for one remain rather confused as to what they are and their nature, and we are all entitled to an explanation of those types of matters.
I don't know if there is any substantiative policy disagreement, or if it's just personalities, or individual choice. If it is a substantiative policy issue, we don't need to find out RIGHT NOW, but it would be fair to ask if there is such a thing, and over what timeframe the parties will feel comfortable talking about it.
-- -george william herbert george.herbert@gmail.com
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Yes, it's reasonable to have curiosity. It's not reasonable to demand and believe we're entitled to know every single detail. They did acknowledge such curiosity would arise on their letters, they both said they'd not comment further upon it.
So, 1. They know there's curiosity. 2. They've explicitly stated their wish to keep their reasons private for a while 3. Therefore, we demand they explain us, we deny that right to them, we will force them to explain right now.
Is that how it is?
George Herbert wrote:
On 3/22/07, Pedro Sanchez pdsanchez@gmail.com wrote:
You and I aren't entitled to demand an explanation and to know every small detail. It's between Danny and the Foundation.
It is, however, unreasonable not to expect there to be curiosity and no small degree of consternation when two longtime key employees announce their departures over a couple of days.
The difference is that Brad gave about a month's notice. Danny left last Tuesday with no prior notice. Danny's resignation caused some comment on internal-l. Anthere decided that since we were talking about resignations, this would be a good time to announce Brad's pending resignation, also to internal-l. That is why Brad has chosen this time to make his announcement to foundation-l, simultaneously with Danny's announcement. The close timing is artificial. Brad was careful to make this point on internal-l, so I don't think he will mind me making it here.
-- Tim Starling
Hoi, Even when there is a contractual obligation to give notice, it is possible for parties to a contract to agree for an immediate parting of the ways. Particularly for jobs involving trust, like in computer system management and security, this is a standard practice. Thanks, GerardM
On 3/23/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Danny left last Tuesday with no prior notice.
Was he not contractually obliged to give notice?
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Even when there is a contractual obligation to give notice, it is possible for parties to a contract to agree for an immediate parting of the ways. Particularly for jobs involving trust, like in computer system management and security, this is a standard practice.
That seems the most likely explanation. "He left with no prior notice" is an slightly odd way to put it, though.
Was he not contractually obliged to give notice?
I hadn't realized that you were privy to employment contracts. If that's what you read in the contract it must be true.
There's no need for sarcasm, pretty much every employment contract requires notice (under UK law, you even have to give notice if you don't have a written contract - I don't know about US law, of course), so it's a fair question.
Thomas Dalton wrote:
Was he not contractually obliged to give notice?
I hadn't realized that you were privy to employment contracts. If that's what you read in the contract it must be true.
There's no need for sarcasm, pretty much every employment contract requires notice (under UK law, you even have to give notice if you don't have a written contract - I don't know about US law, of course), so it's a fair question.
Where I live (Utah), you are not required to issue a formal resignation unless it is explictly in your contract. In fact, you can resign from your employment simply by not showing up to work or three consecutive days. It is the option of the employer to decide if they will hire you back if you have an accident and were unable to contact them due to some unfortunate circumstances. This is state law, and overrides most employment contracts as well in most situations. A corporate officer is a bit different, as this might have applied in this exact case. Officers of non-profits are even trickier, as there are some notifications that may have to be filed with the government that may also be public records. The WMF doesn't have to make it easy for you to get those notifications, however.
Still, I understand where you are coming from, and it isn't unreasonable to be curious here.... just that you may not get the answers you are seeking. Nor should you be expecting them.
-- Robert Horning
Robert Horning wrote:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
Was he not contractually obliged to give notice?
I hadn't realized that you were privy to employment contracts. If that's what you read in the contract it must be true.
There's no need for sarcasm, pretty much every employment contract requires notice (under UK law, you even have to give notice if you don't have a written contract - I don't know about US law, of course), so it's a fair question.
Where I live (Utah), you are not required to issue a formal resignation
So Robert, where in Utah do you live? Are you closeby at all?
Jeff
The difference is that Brad gave about a month's notice.
I would also note that Brad specifically said the two were not related in his original mail to this list :-)
On 3/23/07, Tim Starling tstarling@wikimedia.org wrote:
George Herbert wrote:
On 3/22/07, Pedro Sanchez pdsanchez@gmail.com wrote:
You and I aren't entitled to demand an explanation and to know every small detail. It's between Danny and the Foundation.
It is, however, unreasonable not to expect there to be curiosity and no small degree of consternation when two longtime key employees announce their departures over a couple of days.
The difference is that Brad gave about a month's notice. Danny left last Tuesday with no prior notice. Danny's resignation caused some comment on internal-l. Anthere decided that since we were talking about resignations, this would be a good time to announce Brad's pending resignation, also to internal-l. That is why Brad has chosen this time to make his announcement to foundation-l, simultaneously with Danny's announcement. The close timing is artificial. Brad was careful to make this point on internal-l, so I don't think he will mind me making it here.
-- Tim Starling
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Hoi, The sad thing of cliff hangers like this is that we do not celebrate the good that Danny did. In stead questions have been raised about why Danny sought to leave. Given that the impression is given that there are issues, it is sad that they cannot be addressed now because what is there to address? Thanks, GerardM
PS Thanks for all the good work that you did.
On 3/23/07, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Pedro Sanchez wrote:
You and I aren't entitled to demand an explanation and to know every small detail. It's between Danny and the Foundation.
We can demand explanations as much as we want, but he's just not required to answer.
Ec
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 3/23/07, Pedro Sanchez pdsanchez@gmail.com wrote:
Huh? He's free to resign.
Yes.
He's not forced to give an explanation to anyone who asks.
Yes.
He's specifically said he doesn't want to discuss his reasons *at the moment*, so please stop demanding so.
The way he said it left two questions open, I asked them and I feel free to do so. If you mean "demanding" in a way that he is morally bound to behave differently, I don't know. Of course he is free to answer my question or not. Or he can choose to wait for his statements until he is in the middle of his election campaign. Of course, anyone is free to make up his own mind about that as well.
Thanks, Mathias
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org