We can assume you decision was arrived at in good faith without agreeing with it.
Keeping the report secret while a secret comittee reviews it and prepares a response is, I believe, the wrong decision. I hope you will publish the report now so that the response can take account of comments by the WMF and WMUK communities Joe On Feb 6, 2013 1:28 PM, "Andreas Kolbe" <[email protected]> wrote: > I would suggest that real-world discussions like this do not benefit *at > all* from quoting *editing* principles like "Assume Good Faith". > > It's weird and cultish. Besides, it is irrelevant. Good faith has nothing > to do with accuracy of judgment, or objective morality. > > Andreas > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:11 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Tom, >> >> I think it is more a matter of what standards "we" (as the membership) >> should expect from a) the board and b) WMUK the firm (which is undoubtedly >> what it is). >> >> I value you your contributions because you are always pushing "us" (the >> membership, the board and the staff, i.e. the firm as a whole) to raise >> our standards. Often what you propose is quite practicable, if it wasn't >> for the other activities the organisation is doing. It is Jon's job to >> organise those priorities. You may disagree with how he goes about that, >> as no doubt we all shall from time to time. However, I am not sure how >> helpful it is to question his good faith, short of supplying pretty clear >> evidence to support what your saying. >> >> You have drawn certain conclusions from previous experience, but I do not >> think that is anyway indicative of any lack of good faith. From my own >> experience of dealing with the office - and indeed as reflected on the >> list - one problem seems to be we have all been over-ambitious about what >> we want to achieve. This has lead to the office becoming very hectic, with >> a certain amount of over work. With current plans to recruit more staff, >> this should lead a situation when WMUK (the firm) can more closely realise >> the sort of standards which you advocate. >> >> Please don't hold back from raising these issues and advocating more >> exacting standards - just be a bit more understanding if they are not >> always met. >> >> all the best >> >> Fabian >> (User:Leutha) >> >> >> > Message: 5 >> > Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 09:30:17 +0000 >> > From: Thomas Dalton <[email protected]> >> > To: UK Wikimedia mailing list <[email protected]> >> > Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Governance review >> > Message-ID: >> > < >> caltqccdx7o8geapatsvt+vn3jblukboehkjkimwe3grkvwh...@mail.gmail.com> >> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> > >> > I don't want background. I want you to publish the report now. You don't >> > need any more response than "we're looking at it and are beginning >> > discussions with the community, we'll have a fuller response in a few >> > weeks". You could have written that months ago. >> > >> > Last time you used the "we need to prepare a response" excuse to delay >> > publishing something you ended up publishing it without any response >> > anyway and nothing bad happened, so your good faith is very much in >> doubt. >> >> > On Feb 6, 2013 9:16 AM, "Jon Davies" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> Tom, It might be sensible to check with us directly before posting. We >> * >> >> have* been preparing but need to get a lot of consensus even for a >> >> 'short >> >> response'. I think your email was unfair to Chris and a little rude. >> >> Please assume good faith. >> >> >> >> Phone me if you want more background. >> >> >> >> Jon >> >> >> >> On 6 February 2013 00:58, Thomas Dalton <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> It doesn't take two working days to prepare a short response saying >> >>> that >> >>> the charity is now reviewing the report. In fact, that could have been >> >>> prepared in advance, since it is the same regardless of the contents. >> >>> It is >> >>> extremely premature to be commenting on the contents to the press >> >>> before >> >>> we've had any discussion about it. >> >>> >> >>> Publish the report now. You've had plenty of time. You're supposed to >> >>> be >> >>> running an organisation that prides itself on being transparent. >> >>> On Jan 31, 2013 11:15 AM, "Chris Keating" <[email protected] >> > >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> >> >>>> > 31 January 2013 (target), 15 February 2013 (deadline) - Final >> report >> >>>>> > - this is expected by the end of this week and will be published >> >>>>> promptly >> >>>>> > (not necessarily immediately) when we get it. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Why won't you publish it immeadiately? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>> So that we have a chance to prepare responses for any media inquiries >> >>>> that might result from it. As I say, we will be prompt about it, and >> I >> >>>> also >> >>>> want to make sure there is a chance for the community to review the >> >>>> findings before our board meeting on the 9th. Someone from Compass >> >>>> Partnership will be attending that meeting, so if there are any >> >>>> questions >> >>>> or clarifications from the community, we can ask them then. >> >>>> >> >>>> Hope this make sense, >> >>>> >> >>>> Chris >> >>>> >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >> >>>> Wikimedia UK mailing list >> >>>> [email protected] >> >>>> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l >> >>>> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Wikimedia UK mailing list >> >>> [email protected] >> >>> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l >> >>> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org >> >>> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> *Jon Davies - Chief Executive Wikimedia UK*. Mobile (0044) 7803 505 >> 169 >> >> tweet @jonatreesdavies >> >> >> >> Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England >> and >> >> Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. >> Registered >> >> Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A >> >> 4LT. >> >> United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia >> >> movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation >> >> (who >> >> operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). >> >> Telephone (0044) 207 065 0990. >> >> >> >> Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Wikimedia UK mailing list >> >> [email protected] >> >> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l >> >> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org >> >> >> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- >> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> > URL: >> > < >> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediauk-l/attachments/20130206/0c6829a1/attachment.html >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------ >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wikimediauk-l mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l >> > >> > >> > End of Wikimediauk-l Digest, Vol 91, Issue 9 >> > ******************************************** >> > >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia UK mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l >> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > >
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list [email protected] http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
