Dariusz Jemielniak, 30/04/2013 11:34:
1.5. In summary, I must protest against the narrative of Deryck's letter,
wherein WMHK's proposal was rejected by malevolent WMF staff with a secret
anti-WMHK agenda [...]
I didn't read anything like that in Deryck's letter.
well, I think that this part does not leave much for good faith
interpretations:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Deryck Chan
wrote:
(cc. Patricio and Jan-Bart as the official contacts for FDC complaints.
Yes, I'm accusing WMF grants staff of foul play with the FDC rules.)
That wasn't in the original letter. :) Also, "foul play" doesn't seem to
require a "secret anti-WMHK agenda". It was just a convenient way to
close a controversial discussion, as you confirm.
Moreover, it's well known that the FDC decisions are based also on
"context" i.e. private information not part of the proposals or
discussions thereof.
It's normal for people outside WMF not to understand them fully, and
after all if the rules were so easy to apply you wouldn't need a "double
track" decision with FDC+staff with final rubberstamping by the WMF
board. It's quite obvious that there will always be room for
interpretation, or in other words what made Jan-Bart «impressed with the
level of [...] flexibility of the FDC members».
Nemo
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
