Oh dear god everyone... [This is in general, not any specific person] I think everyone knows there are a lot of legitimate concerns to be concerned about and certainly Arnnon's actions at Google are legitimate for question however this whole "google is controlling the board/wmf" line of thought is turning into a huge and enormous conspiracy theory and what seems to be a giant school of red herring <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring>. We haven't quite yet gotten to "Frieda has 6 letters in her name and you know what else has 6 letters in it's name? GOOGLE!" but we're getting damn close. If anything the only concern about google I've heard within the actual WMF is that the "Knowledge Engine" was a plan to 'compete' against google for traffic (for the record my personal opinion is that would be a waste of money on something we could never succeed if true but ALSO that it isn't actually true at all at this point).
There are a lot of people with legitimate and understandable concerns (in many ways I wish I could take part in the discussion but there is just no good way to do that) but please let's try to keep the lines of thought as sane as possible (which I know is the norm for all of you so I know it's possible). When people get worked up and there is a lack of information our imagination can always get the best of us, I certainly understand that, but it is rarely helpful. James User:Jamesofur User:Jalexander-WMF On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 2:03 AM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 10 January 2016 at 09:53, Yaroslav M. Blanter <pute...@mccme.ru> wrote: > > On 2016-01-10 10:49, Lilburne wrote: > >> Meanwhile one knows that a Google appointed board member objected to > >> James, > >> presence at a meeting where they were most likely to be finalizing the > >> appointment > >> of another from the Googleplex, who is a little tarnished. > > Would you please remain civil. We do not have a Google appointed board > > member, nor the bylaws provide a possibility for Google to appoint a > board > > member. If you mean Denny, he was not Google appointed, but community > > elected, which makes a big difference. I, for one, voted for him. > > Literally speaking, Denny was appointed by Google to Google, so > "Google appointed board member" is not untrue, though "board member on > Google's payroll" would be less confusing. > > As for a member of the "Googleplex" who is "a little tarnished", well > that's a mild way of putting the facts about illegal activities of > major public interest, very polite even. > > To help debunk conspiracy theorists, it would be interesting to find > out how many of the board of trustees have shares in Google, a useful > way of finding out who is part of the Googleplex. Presumably current > and past employees would have taken their stock options. Is that > possible to discover from the public record in the USA? > > Fae > -- > fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae > > _______________________________________________ > 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> > _______________________________________________ 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>
