[Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content

Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton at gmail.com
Mon Oct 10 11:18:21 UTC 2011

On 10 October 2011 10:19, Florence Devouard <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 10/9/11 11:57 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
>> * Sue Gardner wrote:
>>> Please read Ting's note carefully. The Board is asking me to work with
>>> the community to develop a solution that meets the original
>>> requirements as laid out in its resolution. It is asking me to do
>>> something. But it is not asking me to do the specific thing that has
>>> been discussed over the past several months, and which the Germans
>>> voted against.
>> There is nothing useful to be learned from the Letter to the Community.
> The problem is that what is usually called "the Board" on this list is
> not a single entity. It is actually a group of persons.
> And right now, the situation is that there is no real agreement within
> "the Board" about what to exactly do or not do.
> Accordingly, it is probably tough for "the Board" as an entity to issue
> statements or letters or recommandations without bumping in the fact
> that they do not have a single common position.
> Consequently, there is nothing really useful in any statements they can
> issue.

That may well be the case but since it was the WMF board that decided
we should have this feature, they need to come to a clear decision on
how they want to proceed. If they can't find a solution that satisfies
all of them and the decision has to be made by a vote with a slim
majority, then so be it.

If you are right that the board is split on this (and I expect you
are), then what seems to be happening is that they can't make a
decision so they are telling the staff to make it for them. That is
really not the way a board of trustees should work.

More information about the foundation-l mailing list