On 29 February 2016 at 06:18, SarahSV <sarahsv.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Everything Doc James has said so far appears to have been correct, based on > the information we have. > Ha, like those "Oh, I have done nothing wrong and no have no idea why I was removed" messages we heard for two weeks after James' removal, during which James avoided to mention that just about a week before he got dismissed from the Board, he personally emailed his then-Board colleagues and apologized to them for his mistakes, saying that he himself even considered stepping down but instead now wanted to ask the other trustees for a "second chance" since he's a guy who "learn[s] from [his] mistakes"? Of which we only learnt after insistent nagging by Denny? I don't know if James' removal from the Board was justified or not, and maybe it was not. But I find it difficult to come up with a rationale for suggesting to the world that you were kicked out of the Board without any reason, when you yourself begged the Board for a second chance just a week before that decision. When I ask someone for a second chance, I know I messed something up, and of course I know what that was. At any rate, not mentioning that fact from the start strikes me as surprisingly intransparent, particularly so given that James quickly started to praise himself for his transparent approach, to the extent he eventually even suggested that his removal from the Board was a result of it. Best, Patrik _______________________________________________ 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>
