[Foundation-l] Jimmy Wales in the news

[effe iets anders]

Dear Anthony,

What exactly are you trying to do here? As you are put on moderation on
another list, you coninue your rant elsewhere. I feel you can't blame people
for trying to keep the Foundation in a good relation with and a good image
in the press. The Wikimedia Foundation is one of the most open organizations
I know of. Of course, things can open up a bit more sometimes, but that does
not mean we are evil or bad or anything on that behalf. I do not see why
exactly you are doing your best to get things "in the open" after all this
time. Not only does it not add anything to discussions or does it make the
projects or the foundation any better, it is no longer relevant to the
current situation.

As this is "old stuff", I do not see why it should be posted to
foundation-l. If you have a real point to make, one that preferrably makes
the projects better, I'd love to hear it of course. Until that point. I
would really appreciate it if you could stop your rant and attempts to
damage the Foundation, projects or people.

Best regards,

Eia

2008/3/5, Anthony <wikimail op inbox.org>:
>
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 5:20 AM, Florence Devouard <Anthere9 op yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Nathan wrote:
> >  > <quote>
> >  >
> >  > *In an interview with The Associated Press, Florence Devouard, who
> chairs
> >  > the Wikimedia Foundation, defended Wales and said he had simply been
> "slow
> >  > in submitting receipts." She pointed out that the foundation rejected
> the
> >  > steakhouse expense.*
> >  >
> >  > *A short time later, in an e-mail exchange with her fellow board
> members,
> >  > Devouard reported that she had persuaded the AP that "the money story
> was a
> >  > no story." Yet she proceeded to indicate the opposite, upbraiding
> Wales for
> >  > having asked the foundation to pay the steakhouse tab.*
> >  >
> >  > *"I find (it) tiring to see how you are constantly trying to rewrite
> the
> >  > past," she wrote to Wales in the message, which was obtained by the
> AP. "Get
> >  > a grip!"*
> >  >
> >  > </quote>
> >  > True?
> >  >
> >  > Nathan
> >
> >  Yeah. The first quote comes from a direct discussion I had with the
> >  journalist. The two other quotes were taken from two different emails
> >  sent to the comcom list.
> >
> >  The comcom list is supposingly an internal list to deal with
> >  communication issues. A *private* and *confidential* list.
> >  Unfortunately, some members of that list (and I have no idea who) are
> >  also leaking information. It also happened on internal-l some time ago
> >  (again, no idea who is the author of the leak).
> >
> >  We are currently in an odd situation. I wish from all my heart that we
> >  be transparent as much as possible. But for all the transparency in the
> >  world, there are stuff that is just internal discussion, cases where we
> >  need to discuss openly without the fear that it will make the headlines
> >  the next day. Unfortunately, there is now no way we can be certain that
> >  a discussion we have anywhere, be it irc, email or phone, will not be
> >  leaked.
> >
> >  These are very sad times.
> >
>
> I'm sorry Florence, but if this issue had been brought into the open
> *nearly two years ago* when *I* first started hearing the rumors (so a
> lot of people must have already known about it by then), this would
> have been taken care of then and wouldn't have even made any headlines
> (maybe Slashdot, but not the Associated Press, anyway).  Instead, the
> board and staff chose to try to cover things up, and now you've all
> dug yourself a very deep hole.
>
> You're right about one thing: "there is now no way we can be certain
> that a discussion we have anywhere, be it irc, email or phone, will
> not be leaked".  Of course, that's something that has always been
> true.  That's why you don't lie to reporters and to the public.  And
> that's why you admit problems before they snowball out of hand.
>
> I'm posting this to foundation-l, both because it's more on topic here
> and because I'm on moderation on wikien-l.  I was put on moderation
> there by David Gerard for urging you, on that list, to come out with
> this story before Danny.  Had you listened to me then you could have
> at least gotten your spin out ahead of time.  I even suggested the
> spin: "they did, but then they got caught and now they've stopped" --
> & provide detailed evidence that this is the case.
>
> Believe it or not, my suggestion was made because I felt that it would
> be in all of our interests if you followed it.  And I second the
> suggestion today.  This story still hasn't completely broken - I
> suggest you get it out into the open sooner rather than later.
>
> Anthony
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l op lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>