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

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Given that the language committee is in the business of STARTING projects,
there is no community, it is exactly one of the criteria for starting a
project that there is one. When people who do not speak a language vote in
order to have one, it is of no relevance at all. You may have noticed that
voting is of little or no relevance for the language committee. When a
language is recognised as such, we generally allow for a new project.
Recognition is based on a living language recognised by the ISO-639-3.

When I ask you and Ray a pointed question, it is exactly because both of you
are candidates for a seat on the board of trustees. Pointed questions are
called for because they do not give room to weasel out of taking a
position.. Then again, you can always flatly refuse to answer and make that
seem reasonable.

I am not asking about other committees, I am not involved in them and do not
have much of an opinion on them.
Thanks,
     GerardM

On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 3:26 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> > On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 2:40 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <
> cimonavaro at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >  >> 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
>
>  > Hoi,
>  > Jussi-Ville my question to you: are we a talking shop or are we to do
> what
>  > we aim to do?
>  > Thanks,
>  >        GerardM
>  >
>
> First, let me thank you for giving me the opportunity to fix your
> problem of top posting.
>
> My concern is that there are several things here at play.
>
> There is what the committees (all of them, not just your
> pet one) are *tasked* to do.
>
> There is what the committees themselves internally evolve
> to *aim* to do.
>
> There is what the communities expect the committes to do.
>
> There is what some disgruntled or otherwise, individuals
> expect the committees to do.
>
> There are several official resolutions for each of the
> several committees founding etc. which are not even
> close to being phrased similarly, which does, whether
> you like it or not, create a source of confusion as to
> the role of the several committees.
>
> None of this is clarified. And asking a very pointed
> question at me, who had no part in the resolutions that
> created any of the committees, serves very little purpose
> of clarifying any of it.
>
> Yours
>
> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>