[Foundation-l] Policy modification (was possible reconsideration)

[Mark Williamson]

Let me amend that - apparent unwillingness. I'm obviously not in a
position to say what you think or feel, only to declare how it would
appear from my side.

Mark

2008/5/26 Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>:
> You paint it as a question of one or the other. Either you listen to
> the concerns of people, OR you "do what you aim to do", as if it is
> impossible to do both.
>
> This is a bad premise. I would hope that within the organizational
> structure of Wikimedia, there would be room for sharing ideas, and for
> some degree of controlled democracy. In many ways, the LC is doing a
> great job.
>
> That does not mean that the LC should be completely closed to outside
> input. There should always be room for discussion and serious
> reconsideration of policies, and as of yet I think most people on this
> list would agree with the assessment that you do not appear to have
> listened to a thing anybody had to say about the policy, instead
> defending it without stopping to consider it on its merits. Of course,
> it is fine if you support the existing policy, but such a position of
> supporting the status quo should be reasoned and well thought-out,
> something that a couple of people have provided already with their
> positions here in support of the status quo, but that you have not
> with your circular reasoning and continued unwillingness to lend your
> ear to the concerns of mere non-LC civilians.
>
> Mark
>
> 2008/5/26 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>:
>> Hoi,
>> Jussi-Ville my question to you: are we a talking shop or are we to do what
>> we aim to do?
>> Thanks,
>>       GerardM
>>
>> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 2:40 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>>> > Hoi,
>>> > Ray as a candidate to the board of trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation,
>>> you
>>> > are now in the race to win votes.  That makes you a politician and you
>>> have
>>> > to say and do the political things in order to win. I know and respect
>>> you
>>> > enough that I expect different shades of grey as a consequence.
>>> >
>>> > When you ask people to do a task, when you give people the responsibility
>>> to
>>> > do a job you either give the authority to do the job or you do not. The
>>> > language committee has as its task to be responsible for the process to
>>> > create functioning projects in new languages and new projects in existing
>>> > languages. The objective is to create new languages that are objectively
>>> the
>>> > language they say they are and to ensure that there is a reasonable
>>> chance
>>> > for these projects to succeed. As a consequence a policy was formulated.
>>> > This policy has clear benefits. There have been people pushing their
>>> point
>>> > of view to change the policy. Solutions have been proposed that have as a
>>> > consequence that people have to do things in order to have their POV
>>> taken
>>> > in consideration. When they do not want to do this, It is their choice
>>> and
>>> > it is for them to live with the consequences.
>>> >
>>> > It is exactly because the language committee has the authority to insist
>>> on
>>> > the implementation of its policies that it is a functioning committee.
>>> When
>>> > the community is free to discuss and force changes to the policy at all
>>> time
>>> > because they do not like that their exception will not be granted, then
>>> the
>>> > amount of time spend on endless talk will kill off the interest in being
>>> > part of what will become a dysfunctional committee.
>>> >
>>> > Ray my question to you: are we a talking shop or are we to do what we aim
>>> to
>>> > do.
>>> >
>>> > NB I am extremely happy and grateful that the new projects that have been
>>> > approved by the board have been created.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks Tim !!
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> >      GerardM
>>> >
>>>
>>> Without commenting on any of the contentions between Ray and Gerard
>>> apparent in this message, it does highlight a glaring omission in
>>> the relative powershareing definitions in bylaws of the foundation
>>> and committee and communities and projects and individual
>>> contributor relations.
>>>
>>> No one has ever clarified what the precise role of the committees
>>> is. Not as a general case. Each one seems to have been generated
>>> as a special case, with diverging operative assumptions. This
>>> confusion sorely needs to be clarified in the future.
>>>
>>> Yours
>>>
>>> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>