I also wanted to say that I welcome other people's voices on the discussion page on my reform petition. My story is just one of many and our collective voices matter.
On Thu, Oct 9, 2025, 10:44 a.m. Owen Blacker <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Victoria, > > Thank you for at least presenting your personal perspective on the > disqualification of these 2 candidates. > > I have to say, though, this seems to me like the least charitable possible > view anyone could have taken from both candidates' statements. > > I'm sure this is not what you intended, but what I read from your message > is that: > > 1️⃣ A bad-faith smear campaign from Israel will be enough to rule out any > candidate who posts pro-Palestine, anti-Zionist messages, and > disenfranchise voters who would support a candidate who opposes Israel's > genocide of the Palestinians. > > 2️⃣ A single Board member having expressed anti-Israel comments on social > media is more likely to bring the WMF into disrepute than rumours of the > Foundation being careful to appease the ADL, a propagandist organisation > that disseminates disinformation, that conflates any criticism of Israel > with antisemitism and that denies that a genocide is currently occurring in > territories under Israeli control. > > 3️⃣ A candidate who is looking to increase transparency and help the > community better understand the work of the Board is immediately assumed to > be incapable of recognising a need for privacy around any of those areas — > even despite that candidate already being trusted by 2 different Affiliates > with equivalently sensitive Board-level information. > > If the vetting process is immediately assuming pro-Palestinian viewpoints > and pro-transparency viewpoints to be incompatible with Board membership, > then the vetting process is not fit for purpose. > > I am finding it increasingly difficult to trust the judgement of a Board > who thinks these 2 candidates are so dangerous that they cannot be voted on > or trusted to be onboarded appropriately. This is exacerbated when the most > recent other activities I have seen from the Board are replacing a queer > woman of colour from a non Free nation-state of the Global South with a > white financier from New York City (who I am sure is very competent) and > publishing a policy that seems solely designed to stop the Arabic-language > Wikipedia from displaying a flag on its logo because it makes some people > who are currently supporting a genocide feel uncomfortable. > > The Board seems to think the extremist viewpoints of the news media of a > country that is being condemned by a substantial proportion of the planet > are more important to its reputation than representing the wider community > and its diversity. Given that the Foundation is hosted and staffed > predominantly from a country that is currently falling to anti-democratic > extremism, it is hard to have trust and hope that the Foundation is willing > and able to fight for knowledge and diversity in the face of rising hate > and disinformation. > > (To be clear, I too am writing as an individual, not as a representative > of any organisation I am a part of.) > > -- > Owen Blacker, Cardiff GB, he/him > User:OwenBlacker > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines > at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/RXF3WVGJDYYQCNILC2EREKXSXTSBXN2V/ > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/D5PNHDS6TDRL5AMELGW3BY4UCIJPYBWA/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
