The chapter and wmf were provided with a draft of the report a couple of weeks ago, so there shouldn't be any need to immediately counter factual errors. They should have already been fixed.
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 7:55 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com> wrote:
On 6 February 2013 18:49, steve virgin <steve@mediafocusuk.com> wrote:The board meeting is in less than 3 days - Chris has said he wants the
> Tango
>
>
>
> I’ve always said you have a heart of gold Tom. Give the guys in London 3-4
> more days and we’ll all see it I am sure. If it is longer than that I’ll
> complain too, jointly with you.
community to have a chance to review it before the board meeting, so
they need to publish in the next 24 hours or so to meet his target.
What do you think "the guys in London" should be doing over the next
3-4 days? As I've said repeatedly, and no-one has attempted to
counter, it doesn't make sense to prepare a response beyond "we're
starting a discussion" before the discussion has taken place. Why
can't we all be reviewing the report at the same time?While I am - as an outsider - also very interested in the report, I think the example of publishing the Board's WCA letter shows that it might be helpful to give a bit of time for the subjects of the report to consider some responses for the most likely questions and comments that will start immediately after publication and not responding quickly enough could potentially lead to incorrect facts entering "general knowledge" (like the "fact" that the WCA will cost $500k a year).Best regards,Bence
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org