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