On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Chris Keating chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com wrote:
A decision about how the public consumes Wikipedia content (e.g., Media Viewer) is an editorial decision,
and it's one that the WMF has chosen to
make unilaterally. WMF has furthermore moved to give its staff rights
that
facilitate unilateral behavior in the future. But to the degree that Sue Gardner's policy remains in place (and I'm assuming it does), the WMF's position is that any problematic actions taken by individual staff should be subject to community processes.
I think this is a misunderstanding. Erik's actions are pretty clearly made in his capacity as a WMF senior staff member, and it follows from that fact that the WMF regard this a decision that it is (at least in the final analysis) one that is theirs to take (that is to say, not "editorial"
Arguing that Erik ought to be sanctioned on the German wikipedia for doing his job is, being as kind as possible, futile wikilawyering.
If you disagree with what he is doing then some appropriate courses of action involve speaking to Foundation ED or their Board. There are many other inappropriate courses of action that are being pursued as well, though.
Yeah -- and speaking for myself, I see much more value in approaching this as an organizational issue, than as individual actions.
But when the organization acts unilaterally, it's reasonable to expect that those being overruled will explore all options available to them. And my point is, this one is not merely available, but is endorsed by the WMF itself.
Those discussing the flaws in the approach taken by individual WMF staff members (which doesn't include me) are doing what the WMF has said they should do.
Pete