"Geni" wrote: ++++++++++ Given how spectacularly incorrect your published accusations were that's a pretty pathetic defense. Are you going to apologise?
-- geni ++++++++++ I reported that the Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to sub-let space that it itself is renting. I have an e-mail from the property management firm confirming "the Wikimedia sublease". Erik Moeller has confirmed that the Foundation is seeking to sub-let space. Which "accusations" do you speak of? Why in the heck would I "apologize" for scooping the story that the Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to sub-let office space, if only the speculative intentions were a little off-base (I did not realize that the WMF does not intend to stay at Stillman Street a while longer, since the Foundation failed to communicate any significant "We're Moving Soon!" announcement to the community). I have issued a clarifying statement in the blog comments field, and that should be sufficient, unless someone feels they've been libeled by the Internet Review Corporation. I've received no such legal complaint. When the Watergate story broke, it was felt to be a largely "contained" story. Leslie Stahl once commented, *"*CBS sent me. It was a measure of how unimportant CBS thought the story was in the beginning." As more information seeped out, it became clear that it was a story with much wider implications. Consider me a Leslie Stahl, circa 1972. Greg _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l