Since you still don't understand what you did
wrong, I think you made the
right decision by resigning.
On Oct 2, 2012 7:58 PM, "Roger Bamkin" <victuallers(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I've taken a while to respond for a number of reasons. As Tom M notes
this is upsetting. The other reason is that I'm not reading all of this
because as Tom says its sticky. I'm sure that when he says " but the
solution is not to use the charity to pay your wage" he didnt mean that as
I think he already knows that is not true. However its lines like that that
make the newspapers and the courts.... which Is one reason why words like
"unfortunate" and other underestimations can be useful. As it is I think
that some have used words that overestimate the problems and I'm having
difficulty in thinking thats this is not accidental.
I don't intend to defend my statement line by line. It isnt meant to be a
vindification. Its meant to be informative to those people who are
interested in my understanding of what went on. I don't mention that I gave
so much free time to get a tear but to avoid some people thinking that this
was a plan driven by money. (If it is then its a poor plan)
One can always blame poor communication but we (WMUK) were trying our
best to be transparent and as far as I can see all information that is
being discovered was always available. You can always argue that it wasnt
well advertised but I'm not sure that we could have done more (in some
cases) than issue a press release about me standing down as chair because I
was working for MCC or that the Government of Gibraltar was funding
Gibraltarpedia with Roger and John as assistants. WMUK were being informed
and they were reacting to these events to try and ensure that the situation
was understood and properly managed.
So for example wrt imperfect communication I didn't read Tom's breakdown
until now, and for that I apologise. If someone wants a particular point
addressing then do feel free to email me direct.
Roger
On 29 September 2012 22:58, Thomas Morton <morton.thomas(a)googlemail.com>wrote;wrote:
On 29 September 2012 22:57, David Gerard
<dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 29 September 2012 22:55, Thomas Morton
<morton.thomas(a)googlemail.com>
wrote:
>> review, to make sure we are doing enough to safeguard the reputation
of not
>> only ourselves as a charity but the Wikimedia movement as a whole.
> Chis, I would hope it has nothing to to with reputation! And
everything to
> do with doing things properly and with correct ethics.
> Reputation won't be a concern in those circumstances!
The decision appears to be everything to do with reputation.
Yes. My point precisely.
Tom
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK:
http://uk.wikimedia.org
--
Roger Bamkin
Victuallers Ltd
01332 702993
0758 2020815
Google+:Victuallers
Skype:Victuallers1
Flickr:Victuallers2
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK:
http://uk.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org