[Foundation-l] How far does AGF extend?

[Nicolas Montes]

>
> *[Assume good faith] page in a nutshell:*
>
>    - Unless there is strong evidence to the contrary, assume that
>    people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it.
>    - If criticism is needed, discuss editors' actions, but it is not
>    ever necessary nor productive to accuse others of harmful motives.
>
>
The guideline clearly mentions that we should assume that people who work
for the project are trying to help it not hurt it. But does AGF apply to
Foundation matters? While some believe that the Foundation has been acting
in good faith in this situation and say we should trust the Foundation, many
of us are saying that the foundation should have told us more. However, the
foundation was clearly not acting in bad faith. They hired someone and
either did not think to run a background check or forgot to do one. Either
way, assuming faith with the board is a very dubious thing to do. We can
assume that the board hired Carolyn Doran in good faith. When Carolyn left,
she had a right to have her reason for leaving confidential. If the
foundation wanted to keep her reason for leaving private, they could do so.
The foundation can not be hold to the tenants of AGF. What the foundation
does is above the guidelines, not polices, of Wikipedia. Yes, we should
assume the council is acting in good faith, however, anything that happens
at the Foundation level should be held to the microscope. Everything that
the council does should be looked at in good faith, but when something fishy
shows up, we must look at it AS IF something suspicious is happening.