[Foundation-l] WMF resolution on access to non-public data passed

Mohamed Magdy mohamed.m.k at gmail.com
Wed May 2 11:30:52 UTC 2007

> Let me clarify.
> The resolution was drafted by Mindspillage on the 16 th of march.
> We had a board meeting on the 11th of march. The resolution was on the 
> agenda of that meeting. Which means board members knew that the 
> resolution would be voted upon that day.
> Two board members motionned it to vote (Jan-Bart and Kat).
> Then, on the 11th of april, 3 members voted: Jan-Bart, Kat and myself 
> (unsufficient quorum for it to be passed).
> Michael approved it on the 16th and Oscar on the 19th.
> Technically, that means the quorum was reached on the 16th and the 
> resolution was passed on the 16th.
> It was copied on the Foundation site on the 25th, which means that Jimbo 
> could have added his vote until the 25th practically. But did not.
> When I copy the resolutions, what I usually do is to mention something 
> like "4 approval, 1 against, 1 abstain, 1 vote missing".
> I now realise that Erik is not using the same system...
> So, I will go through all the resolutions to clarify and mention 
> somewhere the exact terminology and what it means.
> In this case, the abstain means "no vote expressed"
> ant
oh no, I was just generalizing and trying to understand each term for 
the future resolutions..I wasn't asking for more clarifications 
regarding this particular resolution ;) but thanks anyway :)

So now you will just agree on a unified layout...


More information about the foundation-l mailing list