I'm currently of the mind that it would be a good idea to shine the bright
light of day on some of the situation inside of WMF to help us get a clear
picture of the facts, from which I hope we can draw reasonable conclusions
and help us to make choices that lead to improvements. At this time we have
a lot of speculation and causes for concern, but we are short on facts. I
agree that donors are likely to be interested in this situation and that it
should be investigated. While I share many of your concerns, I would
caution against going too far. I particularly cringe at your
characterization of the board members other than James; for all we know
their concerns about James may have been appropriate, even if we are
understandably upset at how they handled the situation.

So, while I too am disappointed with this situation, I would also suggest
that we need to be a little bit careful about how we talk about
speculation, allegations, and single-source reports. I would also urge you,
as much as possible even when you're angry, to be careful in your comments
that could step over the line between justified criticism and unjustified
personal attacks. Let's try to be civil, even when we're angry.

Thank you,
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
New messages to:

Reply via email to