Hello, 2010/5/9 Thomas Dalton <thomas.dal...@gmail.com>: > Stu, > > Thank you for telling us your views. You have admitted that the way > this was dealt with was "messy". That such an approach would be messy > should have been obvious to everyone involved, so do you think it > would have been better to take a less messy approach? Perhaps the > Board could have issued a statement saying that the current situation > was unacceptable, explaining why, and that they would have to > intervene to fix it if the community didn't sort it out by a certain > deadline. > > Unfortunately, this looks to me like the board couldn't really agree > on what to do so made a vague enough statement that those board > members that didn't feel it was right to go in a delete everything > wouldn't oppose it but that Jimmy could claim supported his view and > legitimised him doing whatever the hell he pleased. The board needs to > be stronger - when Jimmy does things like this it reflects badly on > all of you, so you need to keep him under control. If you can't agree > on what to do, you need to either defer to the community or come up > with a genuine compromise rather than political manoeuvring to avoid > being responsible for what happens. Also, it would help us choose > board members if you were more public about your disagreements. You > don't have to all present a united front behind Jimmy.
+1 I can't express my view more clearly. Yann _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l