[Foundation-l] did i miss something?

[oscar]

On 9/27/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 9/27/06, oscar <oscar.wiki at gmail.com> wrote:
> > is there an agreement or a resolution covering eloquence having today
> been
> > made steward by tim starling?
> > was the board election also covering these rights?
> > or was he appointed as such by the board? did i miss something?
> >
> > best greetings from a bewildered
> > oscar
>
> Board memebers tend to be stewards. It saves time.


no, mixing up chips and fish this is!

let me explain this, i found out today, talking to a fellow wikian at
kennisnet, that this is not clear to everyone. however such matters should
be considered as familiar to people like erik and tim imho.

1. anthere and angela are among the first stewards, since april 2004 (see
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards)
2. both were elected board member in the 2004 elections june 2004 (see
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Elections_for_the_Board_of_Trustees_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation%2C_2004
)
3. so: the first two elected board members just happen to have been stewards
4. two out of the three board members since 2004 are not stewards, nor have
they been

therefore: not only did erik unjustly request steward-access, thus using his
newly acquired board authority to invoke maximum userrights for himself on
the projects, the rights were actually given to him by his friend tim
starling who never was an elected steward at all, but holds these rights,
just as brion vibber does, purely as a developer, for technical reasons. i
am sorry, but both went out of line here. the fact that he knew how to use
the rights, yet seemed not to know how to take them away raises some more
questions even.

it is because i could amost not believe that both had attempted to overstep
their bounds so much, that i actually thought there might have been a board
resolution of which i had no knowledge at all, therefore the title ''did i
miss something?''
as both of them are certainly no ''noobs'' this also seems to explain why no
apologies were offered i am afraid.

the more i think about it, the explanations offered afterwards i find highly
disappointing too, but maybe i was expecting too much here. "purely for
technical reasons" and "yay for self-mutilation" sound like someone having
no notion of the responsibility that should go with his position, to be
honest.

oscar