Forwarding to mailing list, accidentally replied off list. Alison, please don't send replies to me personally as well as the list, it messes up the reply-to headers - thanks!

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com Date: 2008/8/13 Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Paul Sinclair To: wikimedia@alisonwheeler.com

2008/8/13 Alison Wheeler wikimedia@alisonwheeler.com:

I, amongst others, have been seeing these calls for additional information as very close to trolling / stalking. Taking your points in order however:

If you kept us up-to-date without me having to repeatedly ask, then I wouldn't have to repeatedly ask, would I?

On Tue, August 12, 2008 23:51, Thomas Dalton wrote:

...

Correction, there is no *legal* requirement. There is a moral requirement that people know who it is representing them.

"Moral" requirements don't cut much ice in this situation. Like it or not, WER Limited is obliged to operate under the Company Law of England & Wales as that is the law it is registered under. The Company as a whole represents Wikimedia in the UK. It doesn't, per se, represent individuals.

Most people think it a good idea to behave in a moral fashion, whatever the situation...

...

As I understand it, Paul will have to stand down at the upcoming AGM, since he was appointed not elected.

That is correct. One-third of the Board is required to resign each year and may seek re-appointment.

I'm confused by your second sentence. That rule isn't relevant to Paul. Paul has to stand down since he hasn't been elected. Then, a third of the remaining directors (of which there are 3, so 1 of them) has to stand down. There is also an empty seat on the board at the moment, so that will also be up for election.

...

Assuming you actually allow interested parties to take part in the AGM (if you don't, you can expect trouble), I strongly doubt he'll be elected without telling the electorate a little more about himself.

As with every other registered company we will have an AGM to which all members of the Company will be invited, they being the "interested parties" required by law who are empowered to vote. As regards your bracketed aside I do not appreciate threats and would suggest you cease making them.

The interested parties are any contributor to Wikimedia projects with a connection to the UK. You don't respond to polite requests, so I have to resort to threats. If you use your incompetence in failing to get things sorted so people can become members to get out of being held accountable to the community based on a technicality, then I will have no choice but to take what action I can. If it comes down to it, we'll found a new chapter. It's been discussed in private and there is support for such an action as a last resort. I expect the WMF to support such an action if the community is behind it.

...

His on-wiki identity, at the very least.

As I said above, this repeated calling for what is, in every sense, unnecessary information - from a legal standpoint - is becoming very close to stalking. Should *any* member of or candidate for the Board wish to disclose information about themselves in addition to that required by Company Law to be published is their choice and theirs alone. It will never be something demanded by the Company.

The company isn't demanding it, the community is. We don't care about the legal standpoint, we just want to know who is running *our* chapter. I'm aware the company probably isn't able to release the information without Paul's consent, which I why my requests have been directed at him (others have made more general requests). If you actually cared about the community, you would be encouraging him to comply with our request.