Nathan skrev 2014-04-27 19:09:
The potential problem is straightforward. Look at the FDC recommendation
for WMDE in the same round as the staff assessment you linked; they are
very similar - same conclusions, even similar or identical language. A
little analysis would reveal how often the FDC deviates from staff
assessments, perhaps someone has done that already? If the answer is not
often, then pointing out that the FDC writes its own recommendations is
disingenuous - the staff assessments are clearly quite influential in the
final decision.

This is not how it works. The assessment gives some key things not to be overlooked by FDC. But the discussion we have is not starting from the assessment but from our own observation. And the written recommendation is complied from comments from the FDC members (where there also must be several of us agreeing on the point). Then in in many cases we have the same opinion among us mebers and beteen us and the assessment

This is definitely a tangent, but a real point. The FDC members come from
interested parties. Conflict is unavoidable, no matter how careful you are.
Can you expand on this, why is there a conflict, that I am involved in FDC discussion for all entities except WMSE (where I am i the election committe, not the board) and for whos proposal I do not take part


Wikimedia-l mailing list

Reply via email to