We are not "seeing movement" by a vague statement of "we're working on it".
In the case of James Heilman, they said essentially the same thing. What resulted was a vague statement that used a lot of words to say nothing at all. There needs to be full disclosure and specifics, not a lot of waffle.
We need a commitment to give a fully detailed statement by a specific time, or else this isn't "movement", just delaying and obfuscating like last time.
Todd
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:39 PM, Matthew Flaschen < matthew.flaschen@gatech.edu> wrote:
On 01/13/2016 12:00 PM, Fæ wrote:
Please make your timetable public, so that the community is reassured that formal communications such as this letter to the board are not a waste of time, and that the WMF chair is not only aware of community concerns but is taking these questions seriously.
Thank you.
I don't know if the board is able to make the timetable public, but I also think it's important that we know whether the board is still working on this issue, or whether they consider it done.
To that effect, I appreciated your update yesterday ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Requests_for_comment/Vote_of_no...), where you relayed that (per Patricio) the board is still discussing the issue.
I am glad to know the Board is working on this. It needs to be handled properly, but we also need to see movement.
Thanks,
Matt Flaschen
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe