I used the word Superprotect but could just as well said the disastrous implementation of Visual Editor, which definitely was not the doing of Lila. And the very positive response to Community Wishlist i have read on this list (and on the talkpages), I have not co,me across any real negative feedback.across

I am happy to read that there were several in the tech org who initiated this, and that there is a positive feeling of it. I was 25 years ago for seven years was a manager of a org developing sw tools for 3000 sw developer (very similar the WMF setup) and I went through the process of going from inside-out. And I learned that the setup of "wishlists" etc was the easy part. I learned that when this was in place the internal org and roles had to be redefined (it was not upwards you had to look what to implement but to the community). And there were a lot of squeaks before the org got sorted out, but then the people got very stimulated working in a outside-in organisation.


And from this perspective I actually think the Board made a very good work identifying the competence Geshuri has which I believe is just what the Board and WMF needs just now. The problems associated with him is already identified and I am not denying these, but please give the Board also credit for their good work, not just blaming when (and if) they make mistakes

Anders







Den 2016-01-09 kl. 21:46, skrev Pete Forsyth:
Sarah, thanks for the response -- but I find this puzzling. I don't want to
get into too many details here, as I think the comment thread on the
Signpost op-ed, or the poll on the letter's talk page, are more appropriate
venues for that; but briefly:

On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 12:30 PM, SarahSV <sarahsv.w...@gmail.com> wrote:

Pete, it does seem that since Lila arrived a lot of the tension between
the Foundation and community has gone. I've several times heard her talk of
the need to respect the community because Wikipedia is nothing without it.

I am more interested in discussing actions than words.


​You wrote above: "​As I understand it, we are still very much in the
'Superprotect disaster' era -- one which began under the same Executive
Director we have today."

Superprotect was implemented just after Lila arrived, but it was a decision
of Erik's.

I'd say "citation needed," but in this case I am highly confident that no
citation exists. We have had no formal statement whatsoever on which to
base speculation. Beyond that, Lila was Erik's boss; and people closer to
the situation than myself have actually (privately) asserted just the
opposite, that Lila was the driving force.

The tensions behind it were very much a product of the pre-Lila
era, and had been growing for years.

I very much agree with this, yes.


It appeared that Lila quickly understood that it needed to go.

I do not agree with this. She did acknowledge that the software feature had
been a problem, when she announced its removal. (Keep in mind, its
implementation happened on a Sunday afternoon, and its removal took a year
and a half -- so I'm not sure about "quickly.")

But more importantly, neither she nor the board have acknowledged, much
less moved to address, non-technical aspects of the letter.

-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: 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, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: 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