[Foundation-l] Reflections on the recent debates

[David Goodman]

The question is not about your honesty, Mike, but the WMF board. In
authorizing their statement, did they expect that Jimmy would take the
sort of action he did? In practice they are the only ones who have any
control over what actions he takes; I would expect that after an
hysterical over-reaction like his giving their statement as
justification, they would promptly act to explain that this is not
what they meant by their statement.  Rather, the initial reaction of
at least some of the board were to support his actions.

It reminds me very much of the enWP's actions after the single handed
mass deletion of BLPs. They too endorsed it. They cannot most of them
have really thought that thoughtless action of that sort was the way
to solve the problem, but they endorsed it anyway. In the eyes of many
of us, by doing this they lost a good deal of their respect and
legitimacy.

The board is doing likewise, but it still has time to correct itself.
I do not know who besides themselves  could abolish a system-wide
permission, and i call on them to end the founder permission because
of its uniquely great potential for inappropriate use-- which would
allow the various projects to do as they choose about the other
permissions on their own projects.

I continue to respect Jimmy's views more than that of any other single
person here (except perhaps your own, Mike, based on your very
judicious comments here), but  that is not the same as giving any one
person unchecked power over the project.

David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG



On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 10:02 PM, Mike Godwin <mnemonic at gmail.com> wrote:
> Florence writes:
>
> Besides the fact Mike is using a language far too convoluted for many
>> speakers on this list,
>
>
> Ouch! If I do say something too convolutedly here, please send me a note,
> and I'll rephrase accordingly.
>
>
>> I would argue that one of the implications of the
>> abusive deletions is that Jimbo is perceived as having "lost touch with
>> base". I do not think letting someone speak on his behalf will help
>> restore trust.
>>
>
> Just to be clear about this: Jimmy didn't ask me to speak for him, and I
> haven't represented here that I'm speaking for him. I'm only offering my
> personal (convoluted!) point of view, trying to be helpful.
>
>
> --Mike
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>