Al (Majorly) knows Paul's identity and is satisfied with his qualifications and suitability for the job, which is enough for me. I'm not sure it's constructive for people to keep pushing this.

However I think it is legitimate for people to hope that membership would be expanded prior to the AGM, either by accepting new members at the meeting or by letting people on this list sign up for free over the next few weeks (since accepting fees is still not an option). WMUK is supposed to represent all UK Wikimedians, for which open membership seems like an absolute base requirement.


2008/8/13 Adam Brookes <>
I can't claim to have followed this list or the activities of
Wikimedia UK generally for that long but the issue of Paul's
background has very quickly emerged as a significant one. I think it
is disappointing that Alison doesn't seem to feel that this
organization should be striving for transparency above and beyond what
is required by law especially considering the desire for charity
status. Looking at the data that Company House hold it would seem that
the directors have a lot more important things to worry about than
trying to keep information about Paul's background out of the public

Although I have seen the calls for more information about Paul
repeated I don't feel it is reasonable to brand these as "trolling" or
"stalking". Whilst I have no knowledge of what motives particular
individuals to make these calls I can recognise the desire for greater

I think it seems clear that whilst the questions about Paul continue
many people will lack the confidence to donate their cash to the
organisation which I assume is part of the longer term strategy to
support its operations. I became aware of these ongoing concerns very
quickly and I suspect others will also do so.