[Foundation-l] Wikipedia Policy Interlingual Coordinationn - WP:NOT

[Birgitte SB]

--- On Sat, 8/8/09, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:

> From: Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia Policy Interlingual Coordinationn - WP:NOT
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Date: Saturday, August 8, 2009, 1:31 AM
> Birgitte SB wrote:
> > I don't know that it is useful to make a general
> policy for exceptions.  I think it is better just to
> watch out for such problems to pop up and try to direct
> attention to them when they are noticed.  
> >
> > I think it is a better use of time and energy to wait
> and react to the sorts of extreme situation you suggest,
> rather than to seek to proactively verify that no wikis are
> in danger of developing such situations.  Not that I
> would stop anyone form volunteering to take such task
> on.  It is just that it is very tricky.  It
> probably would be more effective to wait till the locals
> complain and ask for help than to try and step in and accuse
> admins, who likely have put the most time and edits into the
> wiki, of mismanagement.  Oftentimes locals that even
> have disagreements with the admins will be inclined to
> oppose your interference on the principal of solidarity, the
> devil you know, etc.  It is very touchy situation that
> leans towards misunderstandings even when everyone speaks
> the same language.
> >
> >   
> As much as I have always supported project autonomy, I know
> from 
> experience on Wikisource that certain malevolent
> individuals like 
> Pathoschild will leave no facts undistorted to achieve
> their ends.  I 
> found what happened there deeply offensive.
> 
> I did ask for help here. You asked then that I move the
> discussion back 
> to the project, and out of respect for you I did. 
> That accomplished 
> nothing. I suggested mediation, and you effectively
> refused.  
> Bureaucrats should have enough experience, stature and
> impartiality to 
> be able to step into these situations and bring people to a
> common 
> understanding instead of burying their heads in the sand
> and pretending 
> that there is no problem.  A community like the one at
> Wikisource is 
> obviously too small to have a formal arbitration process,
> so we should 
> be able to expect better leadership from the
> bureaucrats.  So perhaps it 
> is time for some kind of system outside the project that
> can look at 
> these personality problems more objectively.
> 
> Ec
> 

I have been offline since Friday and just read this message.  I am too angry at your mis-characterization of me to trust myself to respond in any depth.  But I cannot allow anyone, including you, to mistake my silence is any sort of agreement.  I failed to resolve things to your satisfaction, but I approached you in good faith.  When I was not able to help you; you could have approached others or returned the issue to the list then. Instead you wait months to spin things in a false light and label people "malevolent". You have lost touch with the fact that we are all acting in good faith towards what we each believe the best path for the projects. When we find ourselves at odds it is not because one side is evil and the other good; but because we rank different values as more important than others. Leave my name out of your future emails.

Birgitte SB