On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 10:00 AM, MZMcBride <z...@mzmcbride.com> wrote:
> Nathan wrote: > >In any case, its irritating to see people providing cover for the Board's > >lack of transparency or failure to be forthcoming in a timely manner. > > The removal resolution was approved on December 28, 2015, according to > wikimediafoundation.org. Unlike most Board resolutions, it was publicly > posted the same day. The posted Board resolution was accompanied by two > separate e-mails to this public mailing list (one from James, one from > Patricio) on the same day. What kind of transparency and timeliness are > you looking for, exactly? What level of explanation would be satisfactory? > > >Why not let them make their own excuses? > > Excuses for what, exactly? The Chair of the Board announced the decision > and other remaining Board members have chosen not to publicly discuss the > issue here. This is hardly unusual. Regarding the removal itself, at least > in the United States, it's fairly common for members of a body to be able > to remove/expel one of their own. The Wikimedia Foundation Board of > Trustees bylaws explicitly allow for removal of a member, with or without > cause. Unlike in older Board resolutions, there's a clear public > accounting of how each of the Board members voted (as opposed to simple > numeric totals). James posted that he will work with Patricio to provide > a fuller explanation of the removal. It seems most prudent to wait for > that. While this will sound trite, perhaps we could extend a little good > faith to the members of the Board, most of whom are long-time trusted and > respected Wikimedians and all of whom take their role seriously. > > MZMcBride > > If you aren't sure what I or others are still looking for from the Board, please refer to the various other posts to this and other threads. I suspect you've read them already, so I'm not sure why you think it helpful to pretend like you don't understand. Asking for the board to be forthcoming isn't an attack or an unreasonable expectation. No one on the board should be surprised to discover the subscribers to this list and others have high expectations for communication and transparency. If they had time to fully consider their decision to remove James, then they had time to plan for how to communicate that decision. If they are scrambling behind the scenes to do that now, then it suggests the decision to remove him was either rash or an emergency. In either case, that is something many of us would like to know. ~Nathan _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
