[Foundation-l] WMF and the press

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
I do not think it is necessarily a lost cause, far from it. They are two
opposite forces shifting slightly from one side to the other and as we
mature as an organisation things will become more stable.

In my opinion, the relevance of what happens in the Foundation is
exaggerated, true relevance is in what happens in the projects. I find it
thrilling that people are considering a WikiRadio (I put it on my follow
list on Meta). It is important because when it happens it does because of
the initiative of the people that want to see it happen. It is similar to
the Wikipedia Weekly and the Not the Wikipedia Weekly, both are worth
attention :)

It is sad that the minutes are not available of the board meeting yet, it
would not surprise me when they make it even more clear that a council to
deal with the projects is an experiment that is allowed to happen. I believe
that if Effeietsanders and his team want a council they can start one, and
when they add value, they will get a lot of the influence they asked for. It
will just not come in the format they hoped it would be
Thanks,
     Gerard

On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 8:53 PM, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> --- On Sun, 4/27/08, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] WMF and the press
> > To: birgitte_sb at yahoo.com, "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> > Date: Sunday, April 27, 2008, 1:47 PM
> > Hoi,
> > There are two opposing forces, there are those that want to
> > present a
> > positive face to the WMF and there are those who consider
> > that everything
> > should be in the open and everything is permitted to be
> > said. The argument
> > that negative publications impact the ability to raise
> > funds is a powerful
> > one. There have been people that have indicated never to
> > donate to the WMF
> > again. When I talk with people from organisations about the
> > WMF, I am often
> > asked about the latest reason why Wikipedia / the WMF is in
> > imminent danger
> > of collapse... I get used to it.
>
> If those are really the only two opposing forces you must be able to see
> that one will always be able to ensure the other fails even if it does not
> manage to completely succeed itself.  It is logically impossible for
> "present a positive face to WMF" to prevail over "everything should be
> open".  So why are people still fighting a lost cause?
>
> Birgitte SB
>
>
>
>  ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Be a better friend, newshound, and
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>