2016-02-29 23:19 GMT-08:00 David Emrany <david.emr...@gmail.com>: > so reading your email, we also recall these quotes from the time of the > Stanton Foundation fiasco ? [1] > > "The Executive Director and Chief Revenue Officer agree that in the > future, any grants that are not unrestricted will receive a special > high level of scrutiny before being accepted." > .. > "The ED plans, with the C-level team, to develop a better process for > staff to escalate and express concerns about any WMF activities that > staff think may in tension with, or in violation of, community > policies or best practices. It will take some time to develop a > simple, robust process: we aim to have it done by 1 May 2014."
I'm not sure if there's a question for me here? I wasn't involved in the Belfer project until the postmortem. The ED transition happened shortly thereafter. Regardless of whether it came up in that context (I don't know for sure, but I doubt it), the follow-up was lost in the shuffle. Nemo pointed that out a few months later, and Lila's final response on the issue is here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2015-March/077339.html Erik _______________________________________________ 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>
