On 5 March 2012 17:07, phoebe ayers <phoebe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 11:32 PM, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> You do realise this has become a toxic electoral issue for the board, >> with people who voted twice for the resolution now backpedalling? > Just for the record, not sure where you got "voted twice"... There's > been one vote on each resolution. The first was the vote on the resolution: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Controversial_content The second was to send a letter affirming the board still considered the resolution a good idea: http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/foundation/253393#253393 "We are not going to revisit the resolution from May, for the moment: we let that resolution stand unchanged." You were also the chair of the Controversial Content Working Group that *wrote* the resolution. > And it was not raised as an electoral issue. I think that's a little > unfair to people (including myself) who are trying to do their best in > a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't situation. I raised it as one, here. If you do not support the image filter, you have given *no* sign that I have seen of not supporting it before your statement for this selection of a board member by the chapters. You appeared (from your actions) to support it before, you claim not to support it now. I believe it is relevant to note this. - d. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l