Philippe - Well - one of the things is - from all public indication from the BoT - it doesn't appear that it's their current inclination to do something like commission an outside review of the situation by a consultancy familiar with Florida NPO governance. I definitely don't want to pronounce early judgement, but both public and private conversations have made me think that this situation is worth a formal investigation, and allegations of potentially intentionally withholding relevant documents from sitting trustees just make me think even more than an outside review is appropriate. I hate wasting $20 or $40k of movement money on such a review, but since, if substantiated and not resolved, thes allegations could be so damaging to Wikimedia, I unfortunately think it's necessary unless James speaks out against the idea.
Best, KG On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 9:56 PM, Philippe Beaudette <phili...@beaudette.me> wrote: > again, i disagree with little (if any) of what you say that. I don’t > agree with the characterization, prior to any sort of investigation, that > something was absolutely wrong. We don’t KNOW what’s gone on, is my point. > > So let’s not speculate until and unless an investigation is completed - > and probably not then either. > > pb > > > > On Jan 2, 2016, at 9:54 PM, Comet styles <cometsty...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I'm quite aware of what James was trying to achieve > > (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Doc_James/Foundation) and I'm > > fully in support of his ideas so if whatever he did was related to one > > of those he mentions on the link, then its quite understandable why > > right now I'm on his side and not on the the other side...5 of whom > > the community did not appoint (or trusts) and one who is there by > > 'default' > > > > The issue is not what James did, it was the drastic step taken and > > above all the silence in relation to this from the 'BoT' which has > > become quite deafening..When you fire someone and them make a > > statement regarding it and why, we all would have accepted it and > > possibly fought it if we had found it unjustified..but when you fire > > someone and then run back into the hole...what are we to assume?..Its > > too early to start an investigation since no one is forthcoming...so > > speculation and allegations are the only things left... I'm not angry, > > I personally don't care but I have seen too much nonsense by the > > hierarchy over the last 5 years to allow another one to be swept under > > the rug under the veil of "privacy" ... > > > > -- > > Cometstyles > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimediaemail@example.com > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>