Tim Landscheidt wrote: > Given the fact that no candidate for the board seems to have > campaigned prominently for this issue in this year's elec- > tion and it does not even seem to have been mentioned in the > two before, I do not see why the board should have decided > otherwise. > > As the re-prioritization seems to have primarily been > triggered by River's rant to this very list, do you find his > behaviour or the subsequent board decision disrepectful of > the community? > > This is not actually that large a surprise as it seems.
A candidate choosing dumps as his main plank of attack in running for the board would most likely be perceived as somebody working as a Trojan Horse for a serious attempt to fork. The one thing good dumps preserve is the possibility of rejuvenating our projects should WMF ever fail - heaven forfend! But they also not-inconsequently are vital to an attempt at forking, even while the WMF were alive and well. So as a former candidate, let me just state that for the best of reasons - sustainability - dumps are indeed a priority for all that take sustainability seriously. This is not a matter of opinion, but just a bald fact. Yours, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
