[Foundation-l] Sakha Wikipedia passed 7000 articles

[David Gerard]

On 26 August 2010 14:50, Marcus Buck <me at marcusbuck.org> wrote:

> What has a limited remit to do with transparency? The things you do in
> your limited remit are extremely relevant to some groups. Our mailing
> lists should be public whenever possible so people have the chance to
> object to wrong or bad decisions, to give additional input, to
> understand decisions etc. That's the basic idea behind transparency.
> Internal-l was created as an internal counterpart to foundation-l on
> purpose for discussions that cannot be done in public (e.g. for legal
> reasons). I hope and assume internal-l sticks to this purpose and all
> topics that don't require privacy are discussed on public lists.


Pretty much. (Most recent exception was personal congratulations on
the birth of a child.) There's a principle that anything that doesn't
need to be confidential should go to foundation-l as well. (Some
people read internal-l but not foundation-l.)


>I don't
> know the reasons why the chapter and cultural lists are internal, I have
> not even ever heard about cultural list (what is it?), I assume there is
> a reason. If there is no specific reason they should be open and
> transparent.


+1

Gerard has offered *no* substantive reason the language committee list
needs such provisions, and instead has offered spurious
counter-attacks and claimed it's an attempt to push people off for
"opportunistic reasons".

It's not. Gerard, it's asking you why on earth you need a secrecy
provision no-one else has, and for you - or anyone else on the
language committee - to explain precisely why this is required, and
why it should be allowed to stand.

Can anyone else from the language committee offer a credible
explanation of their special requirement for secrecy? Surely if this
is a requirement, it can be explained, as Gerard did not.


- d.