Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
Whether or not you have a point about that position having been badly considered or having a been a waste of money -- and I'd be inclined to think that it was at least a little of both -- you've squarely crossed the line between "asking legitimate questions" and "pointless harassment".
Yes, think of the employees! How dare you ask very acute questions! How dare you ask any questions at all! It's harassment, and it's even worse than that! It's pointless harassment!
Even if Timothy has been highly disruptive rather than just apparently very inefficient (which he wasn't), or if it has been donors' money that had been spent (which it wasn't), or if you had /actually/ been appointed to speak for "the number one stakeholder in our projects" (which you haven't); it wouldn't justify your continuing harangue when you have been clearly told that no further substantive information would come until Sue returns next week.
It was donors' money that was spent on this position, Marc. And if you can point me to where Russavia said he was speaking of behalf of the community, and not on behalf of himself, it would be appreciated.
Otherwise, if you think community members can only speak their mind if they have been appointed by the rest of the Wikimedia contributors, this needs to be added to our mailing list guidelines. Or maybe we should get rid of the mailing lists altogether to avoid such misunderstandings in the future.
You've made your point and raised the issue, and now the information for informed judgment is being published. How about you let the /rest/ of the community examine it and reach its own conclusions?
How about you stop telling people what to do? You're not Russavia's boss, so just stop, and do it fast. Thanks.
Tomasz