I think the original point is being diluted by repeated 'meh' opinions.
The issue here is that the WMF claimed no responsibility for the lobbying notice raised on it.wiki and when I asked for clarification were clear that they left these notices for the community. This contradicts the actions of Philippe using his staff account to make changes as he sees fit rather than taking the option of advising the community. If WMF staff are taking responsibility for making corrections or housekeeping for notices based on a WMF undeclared policy (such as not having similar CN and GN running in parallel) then they can no longer claim to have no responsibility when notices create adverse publicity or are used for community approved lobbying for the open movement.
Cheers, Fae -- http://enwp.org/user_talk:fae Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/faetags