I'm sure dismissively calling people's legitimate concerns "playing with
(a) toy" will help greatly in that regard.

If someone's going to apply for a job where they'll be scrutinized by a
large volunteer community, it is not unreasonable to determine if they can
withstand that type of scrutiny by a real world test, nor to find whether
they'll be responsive and direct to concerns brought up when that happens.
The community has had enough of "diplomatic" null statements with lots of
words, and should be. Someone needs to give an answer, not just blather on
and wind up saying nothing concrete at all.

It is right for the community to be fed up with that and demand that a
candidate go through that process. Yes, it would be hard. Yes, it would
discourage some applicants. Those are the applicants we want to discourage.
We want someone who fits well with our particular project, and who will be
responsive and direct with our volunteer community. They are the
underpinnings of every project WMF undertakes.

Todd Allen


On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Tony Souter <to...@iinet.net.au> wrote:

> Folks: are we still playing with this toy?
>
> I've sat here and watched this discourse - variously frivolous, slightly
> insulting, and embarrassing - and said nothing in the hope it would just
> fizzle away.
>
> But amazingly, it's still here.
>
> We have to accept that while crowdsourcing is the genius of Wikipedia and
> a few of its sister projects, it's totally inappropriate for choosing the
> executive director of a big, prominent Foundation that lives in a
> competitive, complex, and often negative jungle. There's a bunch of reasons
> for doing this largely away from the gaze of the rest of the world. Do I
> really need to spell them out?
>
> It would be good to move on to more useful and practical topics.
>
> Tony
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 02/02/2014, at 1:32 AM, Benjamin Lees <emufarm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 3:29 AM, ENWP Pine <deyntest...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Chad, I wonder if Rory has been considered. (:
> >>
> >>
> > Given his history of biting newbies, I'm not sure he'd be in a good
> > position to help solve the editor retention problem.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to