Hello dear all,
on the August 2010 board meeting the board had talked about the
responsibilities of the board, the staff and the committees (minutes
here: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/July_8,_2010 ). The
board had worked through this with the RASCI matrix
On 06/27/2011 11:39 AM, Ting Chen wrote:
on the August 2010 board meeting the board had talked about the
responsibilities of the board, the staff and the committees (minutes
here: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/July_8,_2010 ). The
board had worked through this with the RASCI
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2011 13:04:50 +0200
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Closing projects policy now official
On 06/25/2011 12:54 PM, Béria Lima wrote:
So we should wait for a resolution no? Until there is only your word.
PS
Also, I do not understand why the *language* committee has
a role in this in the first place. Is closing projects often about whether
or not it actually is a language (the expertise field of langcom)?
Most close requests are for projects that would not have been created
under the current
Board has decided to make Closing projects [1] official. The text of the
policy is below (as well as at the mentioned page).
Language committee members who decided to take care about this would be
listed inside of the section Tasks of the members list [2]. During the
next weeks present requests
Hi,
could someone perhaps explain why the board delegated closing policy to
*individual language committee members*? Because as I read it, this advice
to the board is given by one individual, even if the rest of the committee
disagrees (there is a two week discussion but in the end it is a
2011/6/25 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com
On 06/25/2011 11:20 AM, Lodewijk wrote:
could someone perhaps explain why the board delegated closing policy to
*individual language committee members*? Because as I read it, this
advice
to the board is given by one individual, even if the rest of
On 06/25/2011 12:38 PM, Lodewijk wrote:
As you may remember, the report was very long, and even though I speeded
through it, I did not notice it since I wouldn't ever expect it there :) The
fact you published it before doesnt make arguments less valid though.
I think that the argument is valid
*Sj and Ting informed us that Board has agreed with the policy after the
discussion.
*
If i understand right that was in Berlin. So the Board had 2 months to put
that in a resolution, and didn't. That doesn't sound as a approval to me.
_
*Béria Lima*
http://wikimedia.pt/(351) 925 171 484
On 06/25/2011 12:49 PM, Béria Lima wrote:
*Sj and Ting informed us that Board has agreed with the policy after the
discussion.
If i understand right that was in Berlin. So the Board had 2 months to put
that in a resolution, and didn't. That doesn't sound as a approval to me.
No, Ting has
So we should wait for a resolution no? Until there is only your word.
PS: I'm not saying you are lying or anything, but that the final decision
about that requires a Resolution.
_
*Béria Lima*
http://wikimedia.pt/(351) 925 171 484
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a
On 06/25/2011 12:54 PM, Béria Lima wrote:
So we should wait for a resolution no? Until there is only your word.
PS: I'm not saying you are lying or anything, but that the final decision
about that requires a Resolution.
I don't think that it is needed because Board has the final word anyway,
either before you
decided to pull the rug out from under us. The situation is ridiculous.
From: Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2011 13:04:50 +0200
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Closing projects policy now
On 06/25/2011 04:32 PM, Aaron Adrignola wrote:
I also agree that a resolution is needed. Two individuals don't speak for
the whole board and I'm not willing to take your word on it. Up until now
the community has had the say over which projects were closed through the
proposals for closing
14 matches
Mail list logo
