[Foundation-l] Sakha Wikipedia passed 7000 articles

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Other members of the LC can confirm to you that there is little need to
discuss things on our list. Most mails are boringly business like.

When you find the explanation provided not enough, then that is tough. At
the time we were really happy to gain a new member with its qualifications.
I am not willing to abandon people now for opportunistic reasons. We were
really happy and fortunate deepening the experience of the LC as a group. As
there was a requirement for confidentiality, it was and is in my opinion not
fair to filter only one person out.

The added benefit of confidentiality is that we are more free to discuss
things. It limits the amount of double talk a lot.  As a consequence there
is hardly any pre-cooking of mails going on. The language committee is not
the only confidential list. Its remit is extremely limited. Compare that
with the internal, the chapter, the cultural list who are confidential often
for reasons that are as appropriate.
Thanks,
       GerardM

On 26 August 2010 09:44, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 26 August 2010 04:54, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I am not the only one that keep my contributions confidential. There is
> > another member of the LC who has good personal reasons to have the
> > contributions not publicly available. The reason is that there may be
> > repercussions in the professional sphere. When this was discussed in the
> > past, I was and I still am of the opinion that because of this it would
> be
> > best to have a confidential list.
>
>
> This is in no way whatsoever an explanation or justification.
>
> What sort of things are *you* saying that you don't want anyone else
> to hear? If not personal information that should be kept confidential,
> then what sort of things are you actually saying that will
> professionally damage you or someone else?
>
> No, your deliberations should *not* be secret unless there is an
> overwhelmingly good reason. You are not providing one.
>
>
> > In conclusion, yes there is confidentiality, the reason for this is
> > understood within the committee.
>
>
> Then I'm sure you can explain it in terms that make it obviously clear
> why this is.
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>