On 9 May 2010 01:01, Florence Devouard <[email protected]> wrote: > On 5/8/10 7:31 PM, Mike Godwin wrote: > >> I'm not defending such a criterion, and I do not believe that such a >> criterion informed Jimmy's actions. Jimmy can speak better than I can on >> what he was thinking, > > Then let him speak by himself
I think most of us would be biased to hear him speak (well, metaphorically). I too am guilty of such, by ignoring advice (even if good and useful) simply because of who the speaker is. Now, I would expect any public figure like Jimmy Wales to get a bit of shit thrown at him occasionally, even from his own ranks. But I have to say, the tone has been far away from professional here and there. So letting Godwin speaking on his behalf makes sense. It's a fresh new approach to the discussion, because we are not immediately biased by it being Wales speaking. And not to mention that Godwin has a point; this was an opportunity in disguise. And unfortunately, in retrospect, this wasn't really picked up by the community, instead it turned into another 'fight the power' rebellion. I do not condone Wales' methods of handling the whole situation (hell, I am not sure how good he is at PR!), but that is a minor issue, but since of course it becomes the classic 'tyrant' in action, people focuses on the small 'controversial' things. Opportunists, I suppose. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
