On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Thomas Dalton <[email protected]> wrote: > On 13 July 2010 23:30, Milos Rancic <[email protected]> wrote: >> I will talk without mentioning names, but I will try to be precise >> enough. In other words, I don't want to talk about people and >> organizations, but about problems. Taking care about problems is much >> more important than making witch hunts. > > Unfortunately, we can't really talk about problems without > establishing whether there is a problem. Some vague comments about > some vague rumours of corruption in some unspecified chapters doesn't > really count as establishing that a problem exists. If you have > evidence of corruption within the Wikimedia movement, then you need to > present it. You can choose to present it to us or to the relevant > authorities, but you shouldn't just hint at it.
(This is the reply to all of you who complained about not mentioning names.) First of all, I am not able to talk about people who complained me. Second, if I become more precise about chapters, I would again expose my informants. Third, I am not able to talk publicly about particular chapters based on private talks because I don't have any document, just words of a couple of persons to whom I trust. At last, I've suggested reasonable measures for every mentioned problem. For example, in the case of corruption, making a proper audit process should help and it is fully uncontroversial measure. It should be noted that I am not a member of any kind of audit body which is able mark particular problems publicly. I've just got enough information to feel responsible to expose them carefully in public, with taking care not to hurt anyone. I am also open for *private* discussion with all relevant people who are able to fix those problems. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
