--- Traroth traroth@yahoo.fr wrote:
Traroth"
Machine translated text:
I posted the following text: "Wikimedia Foundation: the worm in the fruit? At the time of the constituent assembly of association Wikimedia France, it was known as that Jimmy Wales and Wikimedia Foundation refused the right to him to use the marks which she held (Wikimedia, Wikipedia, Wktionary, Wikibooks...) if Foundation did not have a right of veto (the term made debate) on the decisions that would take the French foundation. Parrall�lement, during the creation of Wikimedia Foundation, Jimmy Wales imposed 3 seats out of 5, by reserving the seat of president, the 2 seats remaining being provided by election (what led to 4 anglophone members out of 5). This sipositif was not to be renewed, and a really democratic election was to take place this year (it is what had been known as at the time). One learns now that Jimmy Wales intends to continue with reserver the seat of president, with probably a right of veto on the decisions. Less democratic, that appears difficult. The one year shift was thus only one means of drowning fish. These manners of making push to be posed a certain number of questions: * For what are used these foundations? * Don't the givers have a right of glance on the use which is made money that they gave? * Isn't this to mislead people to only make believe that a foundation takes care of the inter�ts of Wikipedia, whereas it is only about one organization-tail, without real capacity of decision? * Is this step to mislead people only to give appearances of the democracy, without being to it less world? * What will make the community if Jimmy Wales makes decisions opposite with the opinion of the majority, as it could be that that is the case on the subject of publicity (Jimbo never decided clearly against)? To answer "Y has that to make a fork", it is to slap the givers in full face. We hear well: I do not have anything against Jimbo, and I would have been the first to be voted for him in 2004, and this, as a long time as there would have been ready to remain president. That would have been only one formality. Today, I would be more circumspect. Of what it is afraid exactly? Certain(e)s answered: that Board which would precisely make decisions opposite with the will of the majority. In addition to the fact that it is in complete contradiction with the concept even of democracy, the current system does not put to us with the shelter. Simply, this "privilege" is reserved to only one person. Personally, I intended to rather strongly imply me in the activity of French association, but now, I am with two fingers all to send p�ter. That would be already done if Wikip�dia and the other projects were not in GFDL, which wants to say that they do not belong to Foundation. Without hostility, I would like to work with a collective?uvre, and not with a species of monument to the glory of Jimmy Wales, whatever his merits.
END TRANSLATION
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com