On 25 September 2015 at 05:46, James Alexander <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey Fae, > > As you know that I'm responsible for the spreadsheet that your bot is copying > to make that spreadsheet (since you're one of the ones who asked me to make > the process more transparent) I would have really appreciated a more private > email before this public one. That said, yes there have both been some > changes on the private versions of the sheet that caused the public version > to break as well as very few actual rights changes which means I haven't been > looking at it often. Because of a back log of issues within my Trust and > Safety work I haven't been able to fully find the time to fix and update > everything but I actually have time set aside on my calendar on Monday to do > that :). > > Sent from my iPhone > > > James Alexander > Legal and Community Advocacy > Wikimedia Foundation > +1 415-839-6885 x6716
Thanks for your commitment to get this up to date. Had my question been about the performance of a named employee, I would have sent a private email out of courtesy. This was a simple non-critical question about WMF transparency, following on from an original open discussion a long time ago on this list. This makes this list the best open place to raise the question. I feel that it is ethical to all encourage volunteers to feel free to ask questions about WMF transparency in the open. It would be a positive and ethical approach to take. Making it appear that a volunteer has done something wrong when they try to do so is not a healthy direction to go in. Thanks, Fae _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
