On 19 September 2012 16:01, Thomas Morton <morton.tho...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> It *appears* Roger's interactions have indeed been ethical here - we just > didn't know about it. You appear to be claiming that the default assumption should be corruption, unless stated otherwise daily. This is a weird assumption in the real world in the general case (although it is a standard assumption on Wikipediocracy). > And perception of our organisation is one of the > problems we need to address. This problem appears to be one with your perceptions, i.e. that you make a default assumption of massive corruption and then expect the people you're assuming this of to treat your assumption as reasonable. - d. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
