Hi Emeric, This mail is send to wikimedia-l and to emeric in answer to https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-October/088833.html
>We have a movement employee who brilliantly held management >responsibilities for 4 years (great longevity for an Executive >Director…) who asked for help. And what is the answer of the movement, >of the Wikimedia Foundation? Nothing. Nothing was undertaken to give her >any kind of listening or help. To my knowledge, the lack of reaction of you and the board of the wikimedia france is exactly what happened when the employees of wikimedia france which were under direct and legal responsibility was seeking for help. At the opposite the Wikimedia Foundation conducted an investigation.I don't feel that you are in position to criticize the way the wikimedia foundation handle the claims of Nathalie which is not under their direct responsibility when you made worth for person you ought legally to protect. >Marie-Alice Mathis, who courageously expressed disapproval of the >sexist harassment of Nathalie, was also harassed by community members. >Nathalie and Marie-Alice suffered health damages and had medical leaves >issued by real general practitioners. The Wikimedia Foundation was >informed and what did you do? Nothing, or worst: two messages from your >staff legitimizing the harassment and one from a member of your board >who publicly stated against Wikimédia France without any prior contact >with us. >What kind of help or support did you offer to Marie-Alice? From my point of view a sexual harassment is several magnitude worse than a sexist one, even if I don't dismiss the gravity of a sexist harassment, but I feel like this paragraph is misplaced alongside with accusation of sexual harassment. When you say: >I’ve read an ardent defender of epicene style of writing who is >accusing of lying other women because of their private then public >declarations. Having no clue of what is in the procedure. Thank you for >enlightening me about true fight with feminism. I believe you refer to this quote of Natacha. >Personnally, and as an engaged feminist in real life, I dont believe >one word of these allegations. >My support goes to Christophe, and like you wrote, these allegations I >think are not backed up by evidence as far as I have been informed). To me by saying that Natacha is accusing of Nathalie and Marie-Alice of lying is putting in her mouth far more than what she said. Natacha said that she don't believe one word of the allegations. It is just about her beliefs not an affirmation that Nathalie or Marie-Alice are lying. So you are doing a misrepresentation of the reality. I'm really worried about the accusation of sexual harassment either they are true (it would be dramatic for Nathalie) either they are false (it would be damageable for Christophe and in a great extent to all victims of sexual harassment which their word will be less believed). By reading the archive of the internal discussion mailing list of wikimedia france, all public information, and non public information, the credibility of your discourse is pretty non existent for me. To take only the public part: there was pretty much none communication from your part (at this time president of the wikimedia france) and the direction of the wikimedia france, integral censorship the internal discussion mailing list of wikimedia france, and when there was communication from you and direction of wikimedia france, to my understanding it is systematic gross misrepresentation of the facts when it is not simply lying. This game with the truth has is paramount evident when there is contradiction between several version of the same story by you and the direction of wikimedia france such as the version of the recruting (or promotion) of Cyrille Bertin (In the reply to time line and before the general assembly it was said to help Nathalie in her work and during the general assembly it was said because it was envisioned that Nathalie leave wikimedia france). At the opposite, despite your repeated accusation of defamation towards your opponents (which consist of all the person who take talk except the direction+Rémi Mathis) I never noticed a single hint of misrepresentation of reality. At the opposite by several times, objectives fact came to confirm the discourse of the opponents Moreover there were a long track record of legal threat towards several members of the community which to my knowledge was not found on any evidence and reach any concrete action such as going in front of tribunal. In addition, chronologically speaking, the accusation of sexual harassment against Christophe was raised to my knowledge when you and the direction was in great difficulty because of the decision of the FDC and in the same time there was accusation to Christophe to take part of the decision of FDC. All that makes me, like Natacha not believe the Nathalie's accusation of sexual harassment. To make it clear I don't know if there was harassment or not, I'm just not convinced enough to believe that the sexual harassment was real. Xavier Combelle _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
