New subject: Governance review (Thomas Dalton)

6 Feb 2013

Hi Tom,

I think it is more a matter of what standards "we" (as the membership)
should expect from a) the board and b) WMUK the firm (which is undoubtedly
what it is).

I value you your contributions because you are always pushing "us" (the
membership, the board and the staff, i.e. the firm as a whole) to raise
our standards. Often what you propose is quite practicable, if it wasn't
for the other activities the organisation is doing. It is Jon's job to
organise those priorities. You may disagree with how he goes about that,
as no doubt we all shall from time to time. However, I am not sure how
helpful it is to question his good faith, short of supplying pretty clear
evidence to support what your saying.

You have drawn certain conclusions from previous experience, but I do not
think that is anyway indicative of any lack of good faith. From my own
experience of dealing with the office - and indeed as reflected on the
list - one problem seems to be we have all been over-ambitious about what
we want to achieve. This has lead to the office becoming very hectic, with
a certain amount of over work. With current plans to recruit more staff,
this should lead a situation when WMUK (the firm) can more closely realise
the sort of standards which you advocate.

Please don't hold back from raising these issues and advocating more
exacting standards - just be a bit more understanding if they are not
always met.

all the best

Fabian
(User:Leutha)

...
  Message: 5
 Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 09:30:17 +0000
 From: Thomas Dalton &lt;thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com&gt;
 To: UK Wikimedia mailing list &lt;wikimediauk-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org&gt;
 Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Governance review
 Message-ID:
 	&lt;CALTQccdx7o8GEaPatsvT+VN3JBLukBOEHkJkimwE3gRkvWhRCQ(a)mail.gmail.com&gt;
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

 I don't want background. I want you to publish the report now. You don't
 need any more response than "we're looking at it and are beginning
 discussions with the community, we'll have a fuller response in a few
 weeks". You could have written that months ago.

 Last time you used the "we need to prepare a response" excuse to delay
 publishing something you ended up publishing it without any response
 anyway and nothing bad happened, so your good faith is very much in doubt. 
> On Feb 6, 2013 9:16 AM, "Jon Davies" &lt;jon.davies(a)wikimedia.org.uk&gt;
wrote:
>
>> Tom, It might be sensible to check with us directly before posting. We *
>> have* been preparing but need to get a lot of consensus even for a
>> 'short
>> response'.  I think your email was unfair to Chris and a little rude.
>> Please assume good faith.
>>
>> Phone me if you want more background.
>>
>> Jon
>>
>> On 6 February 2013 00:58, Thomas Dalton &lt;thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>>
>>> It doesn't take two working days to prepare a short response saying
>>> that
>>> the charity is now reviewing the report. In fact, that could have been
>>> prepared in advance, since it is the same regardless of the contents.
>>> It is
>>> extremely premature to be commenting on the contents to the press
>>> before
>>> we've had any discussion about it.
>>>
>>> Publish the report now. You've had plenty of time. You're supposed
to
>>> be
>>> running an organisation that prides itself on being transparent.
>>> On Jan 31, 2013 11:15 AM, "Chris Keating"
&lt;chriskeatingwiki(a)gmail.com&gt;
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> > 31 January 2013 (target), 15 February 2013 (deadline) - Final
report
>>>>> > - this is expected by the end of this week and will be
published
>>>>> promptly
>>>>> > (not necessarily immediately) when we get it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why won't you publish it immeadiately?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> So that we have a chance to prepare responses for any media inquiries
>>>> that might result from it. As I say, we will be prompt about it, and I
>>>> also
>>>> want to make sure there is a chance for the community to review the
>>>> findings before our board meeting on the 9th. Someone from Compass
>>>> Partnership will be attending that meeting, so if there are any
>>>> questions
>>>> or clarifications from the community, we can ask them then.
>>>>
>>>> Hope this make sense,
>>>>
>>>> Chris
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
>>> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Jon Davies - Chief Executive Wikimedia UK*.  Mobile (0044) 7803 505 169
>> tweet @jonatreesdavies
>>
>> Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
>> Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
>> Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A
>> 4LT.
>> United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
>> movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation
>> (who
>> operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
>> Telephone (0044) 207 065 0990.
>>
>> Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia UK mailing list
>> wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org
>> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
>> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
>>
>>
> 

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Governance review (Thomas Dalton)