Hi Cometstyles - A lot of people have put much more of themselves into the project than me but I would like to request that we maintain a civil tone and subject. Regardless of how we feel about professional aptitude I think we should leave personal lives and families out of these discussions.
-Toby On Saturday, January 9, 2016, Comet styles <[email protected]> wrote: > The major problem is and has been for a while is that we have people > in the hierarchy who do not understand how the wiki works, most have > never made an edit out of their 'hidden' wikis or userpages on wmfwiki > or meta.. > > How can one trust a product in the hands of someone who does not use > it? ..We will never get a truthful answer for his removal and the > reason is probably quite petty as well but it shows discord amongst > our so called 'leaders' and its sad and ironic that this had to happen > around the time wikipedia is doing its donation drive..honestly, WMF > has taken a nosedive since Sue left and left the organisation in the > hands of Lila who has failed as a leader..not to mention her > 'baby-daddy' has been banned from most wikimedia wikis as well as IRC > for talking nonsense and is constantly using his blogs to attack the > same organisation his 'ex' is trying to run.. > > --- > Cometstyles/Warpath > > On 1/9/16, Tobias <[email protected] <javascript:;>> > wrote: > > Dear all, > > > > right now, we know very little about the removal of James. It is hard > > for anyone not involved (which is the vast majority of this community) > > to come up with any safe conclusions, because there is a lack of > > evidence. This opens up the possibility of speculation. I would prefer > > the stating of facts instead of speculation, but since that's not > > happening, I think speculation might be a way to incentivize more > > insiders to come forward with facts, if only to refute the content of > > speculation. > > > > I am going to attempt to do this in a neutral fashion, and I will also > > follow another important tradition in the movement, assume good faith. I > > do not subscribe to conspiracy theories that allege a secret plan by > > Google or intentions of harming Wikipedia on anyone's part. > > > > Here's what I think might have happened: > > > > James, a longstanding community member, is accustomed to how we do > > things on Wikipedia -- with transparency, an open discourse, but also > > endless discussions on talk pages. Other members of the board have less > > of a "Wikipedian" background, and are more accustomed to how things work > > in companies: board meetings in secret, focus on being effective at the > > cost of transparency, with a frank tone on the inside, and a diplomatic > > and collective voice to the outside. > > These very different conceptions clash, for instance when it comes to > > the plans of a "Wikipedia knowledge engine": some prefer early community > > involvement and plead openness, others, perhaps scared of the harsh > > criticism of early announced and unfinished products by the community, > > wish to wait with giving out more information. James is frustrated and > > tries to push other board members towards more transparency, which in > > turn makes them wary of him and they mutually develop distrust. > > The pivotal part of the story then is the question of WMF leadership, > > and the fact that there is a lot of discontent among WMF staff with > > senior leadership, as indicated by an employee engagement survey. James, > > being used to transparent discussions, pushes for a thorough and open > > review, and talks to staff members to gain more information. The other > > board members, perhaps somewhat in panic, think he will initiate a > > public discussion about replacing senior leadership and (perhaps > > inadvertently) will cause a major disruption to the entire foundation, > > so they decide to call a halt before it's too late and remove him from > > the board. > > > > > > This is what, given the information publicly available, is in my opinion > > at least one likely explanation of what happened. Please take it with a > > grain of salt, it /is/ speculation. I intend this to undergo the process > > of falsification and encourage anyone involved to call me out on what > > they perceive is incorrect. > > > > Tobias > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > New messages to: [email protected] <javascript:;> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:[email protected] <javascript:;> > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > -- > Cometstyles > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: [email protected] <javascript:;> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected] <javascript:;> > ?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
