On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 11:24 PM, jytdog <jyt...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Pierre that is exactly what I struggle with.  You are saying that throwing
> integrity out the window in the name of politics is OK.  I am saying it is
> absolutely not OK.  The individuals representing the board should have been
> honest and simply said "The board supports the ED" and left it at that, and
> if asked, yes, been honest that support was not unanimous.  Misrepresenting
> things a) accomplished nothing, as we can see now, and b) opened huge rifts
> that remain gaping today.
> I do hear you, that the decision to retain the ED in November was itself
> trust-destroying for you, because you view that as such bad judgement. I
> hear that.
> To me, making public misrepresentations is another thing altogether.  It
> calls into question whether folks are even telling the truth, and that just
> destroys the very basis for authentic conversation.  It is a deeper wound.
> This to me, bars the way to move forward.
> How do we trust what the board says going forward?  How can the board be
> effective, when people cannot trust what its members say about its
> decisions?

Quite. I hope board members have been reflecting on

1. who on the board suggested and pushed for this "unanimous" wording,
2. who on the board felt uncomfortable with it, and
3. whether the latter group was browbeaten into accepting it – and, if so,
what that says about group dynamics on the board.
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Reply via email to