On 1 April 2014 14:23, Marc A. Pelletier <m...@uberbox.org> wrote: ... > That analysis and examination of that bad move would have been done just > and quickly and effectively by polite inquiry than it would have with > shrill cries. > > We're an extraordinarily transparent movement; we don't need > "whistleblowers" -- we need vigilant participants. Compare MzMcBride's > approach to... that of some others on this thread, and you will see the > difference between raising an issue and being needlessly provocative. ...
I am sure than the viewpoint is different for employees within the WMF like yourself, compared to unpaid volunteers outside, like me. This may be part of the reason we see this governance failure in a different light. The evidence of this case, as summarized in Sue's own published words, shows that there were multiple attempts to raise polite inquiry. These were consistently overlooked or ignored over an extremely long period. Yes, the movement certainly does need whilstle-blowers like Tomasz in order for serious failures to be opportunities to take action and learn from. Fae -- fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
