Hi Tobias On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 12:06 AM, Tobias <church.of.emacs...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Dear all, > > right now, we know very little about the removal of James. It is hard > for anyone not involved (which is the vast majority of this community) > to come up with any safe conclusions, because there is a lack of > evidence. This opens up the possibility of speculation. I would prefer > the stating of facts instead of speculation, but since that's not > happening, I think speculation might be a way to incentivize more > insiders to come forward with facts, if only to refute the content of > speculation. > > I am going to attempt to do this in a neutral fashion, and I will also > follow another important tradition in the movement, assume good faith. I > do not subscribe to conspiracy theories that allege a secret plan by > Google or intentions of harming Wikipedia on anyone's part. > > Here's what I think might have happened: > > James, a longstanding community member, is accustomed to how we do > things on Wikipedia -- with transparency, an open discourse, but also > endless discussions on talk pages. Other members of the board have less > of a "Wikipedian" background, and are more accustomed to how things work > in companies: board meetings in secret, focus on being effective at the > cost of transparency, with a frank tone on the inside, and a diplomatic > and collective voice to the outside. > These very different conceptions clash, for instance when it comes to > the plans of a "Wikipedia knowledge engine": some prefer early community > involvement and plead openness, others, perhaps scared of the harsh > criticism of early announced and unfinished products by the community, > wish to wait with giving out more information. ..... > I second your thoughts on the most probable root cause for the current dysfunction, having experienced similar events with various chapters as well, where at least some members particularly with chapters lack the professional/corporate experience and just get elected because of their wikipedian experience. This does call for a better definition of board member election eligibility rules at the chapters and WMF. It is surprising that there does not seem to be well thought out induction program for new members with one of the experienced board member as a mentor. If there was such a process and implemented well, the present problem could have been nipped in the bud or managed better. Best wishes Arjuna Rao Chavala _______________________________________________ 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>
