[Foundation-l] Foundation Discretion Regarding Personnel Matters
Jon Harald Søby
jhsoby at gmail.com
Sun Dec 16 13:23:56 UTC 2007
The Foundation has repeatedly stated that it can not and will not reveal
details about this. What, then, is the use of this speculation? As I've said
to others, it accomplishes nothing. We have encyclopædias to write, let's
focus on that instead.
2007/12/16, David Goodman <dgoodmanny at gmail.com>:
> Working from the actual facts, she was questioned after returning from
> a Board Meeting in the Netherlands that ended on June 3, and was
> removed from the WM staff page on July 10. There presumably was a
> reason. It was either connected with the questioning at the
> immigration and thus presumably some at least of the criminal matters,
> or it was unrelated altogether. If it was unrelated, then at this
> point it is reasonable for the WMF to keep the details confidential.
> If not, they knew some at least of the criminal concerns.
> My working hypothesis, from the crimes you said you did not know
> about, is that the DUI and hit-and-run were in fact known to you. In
> this case, I can understand perfectly both why you would have wanted
> to terminate the employment, and also why you would have wanted to
> keep it confidential at the time. Most employers would. I would have
> Or are you prepared to state that it was wholly unrelated? In which
> case did none of you at WMF know of the immigration stop, or did you
> fail to pursue the details adequately?
> > (shooting people? fraud? fugitive from justice? yow!).
> David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Jon Harald Søby
More information about the foundation-l