On 01/08/2016 12:43 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote:
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
Dariusz, you said in your statement that was published in the Wikimedia
Blog that WMF "considered dozens of candidates from all over the world,
with not-for-profit and technology experience, and the highest professional
standards.” I would be interested to hear how you reconcile "highest
professional standards" with the prior actions of Arnnon,
I have read about these allegations today, and I am going to follow up on
WMF doesn't have the excuse of ignorance, or that the case is in
progress. When you appointed him:
1. The documents were unsealed.
2. The Department of Justice case was fully complete.
3. The civil case by employees was fully complete and payouts had either
started or were fully complete.
Saying you learned about this *after* voting to appoint him is
incredibly frustrating and disappointing.
Being ignorant of the allegations is even worse than coming up with some
dubious reason why we should forgive him, and he's still high-integrity
enough to represent a non-profit backing movement with strong values.
The board had an obligation to fully research both candidates, and
insist on more time as needed to do so.
There is nothing to wait for (the shareholder lawsuit will probably also
be settled, but there is no need to wait for it given the released
documents and fully complete cases above).
for details (though I'm sure someone has linked this from the list).
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org