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