מאור מלולmao...@outlook.com
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 21:22:52 +0100
From: nemow...@gmail.com
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Consultation decision making (was: Board
decisions on movement funding and approval issues)
Lodewijk, 11/02/2014 19:36:
Maybe
Hi all,
On 11 Feb 2014, at 17:58, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote:
I'm very sorry about these decisions. Not only because I disagree with them
on the content (although there are one or two aspects I can live with) and
because I think this is very bad for the volunteers, but also
Hi,
I'm very sorry about these decisions. Not only because I disagree with them
on the content (although there are one or two aspects I can live with) and
because I think this is very bad for the volunteers, but also because the
board returned to a mode where they make decisions without involving
Thanks for this honest critical feedback Lodewijk. It is refreshing to
have a straight-forward statement. Most emails from established
members of our community being critical about the WMF board or staff
seem to feel they need to wrap anything negative in so much cotton
wool and glib praise, that
Per Fae, a short response in bullet points:
* I'm sorry. I take your criticisms seriously.
* How we got to this point, as I see it*: I think the Board felt we had
gotten input from AffCom because we saw their responses to the proposal to
change to a usergroup-first approval model, which was
Hi Phoebe,
Thanks for the swift reply. Please note that the proposal sent to AffCom by
the staff was /not/ the same proposal considered by the board. The
arguments presented with it, were not even close to the ones presented now
- it is unrealistic to expect AffCom to be able to provide any
Lodewijk, 11/02/2014 19:36:
Maybe the board had a reason to rush through this decision without
consultation, but I still haven't heard any satisfying argument for that.
To me it seems rather obvious. The board (together with the WMF
executives?) is worried about more organisations asking
