[Foundation-l] Board members positions toward Jimmy's last action

[Gregory Maxwell]

On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 12:37 PM, phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki at gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't disagree, but I meant what I said about *single* most important issue!
>
> And I'm not sure that's how I'd frame it. The board statement seemed
> pretty clear; reaffirming existing policy. I guess it depends a bit on
> what capacity you think Jimmy was acting in; this is not the first
> time in the last decade that he's used bold action to get us to
> rethink content policies.

This depends on which "us" you're speaking about.  Jimmy is basically
unheard of on commons, except by the English speaking audience that
knows him via English Wikipedia. He has never intervened on commons,
as far as I know, — he only had some 30 edits or so at the time this
began.  Likewise for most of the other Wikipedias which this event has
impacted.


As far as "which capacity", I think Jimmy's own statements make this
abundantly clear regardless of what the PR spin says:

"I am fully willing to change the policies for adminship (including
removing adminship in case of wheel warring on this issue).", "I am in
constant communication with both the board and Sue Gardner about this
issue", and "Some things are simply going to be non-negotiable."