I don't know why you've bothered making any statements here. You just keep leveling accusations against the people that have complained about you rather than actually trying to recognise and address their concerns.
When you accepted the contract with Monmouthshire council, you asked me for my thoughts and I said I thought it would be fine for you to do that kind of work while serving as a trustee, but you have consistently shown a complete lack of understanding of how such a conflict of interest needs to be managed and you continue to do so. Had I realised you lacked that understanding, I would have counseled you differently. On Oct 2, 2012 8:30 PM, "Roger Bamkin" <victuall...@gmail.com> wrote: > Tom, > > Neat, insightful, philosophical. Its tricky to decide how best to describe > your considered contribution.... maybe empathetic? > > I can see with 20/20 hindsight see lots of things I did wrong or could do > better. The most recent was to offer some comments here. Apologies to those > who might have liked a longer discussion. > > R > > On 2 October 2012 20:14, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dal...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Since you still don't understand what you did wrong, I think you made the >> right decision by resigning. >> On Oct 2, 2012 7:58 PM, "Roger Bamkin" <victuall...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've taken a while to respond for a number of reasons. As Tom M notes >>> this is upsetting. The other reason is that I'm not reading all of this >>> because as Tom says its sticky. I'm sure that when he says " but the >>> solution is not to use the charity to pay your wage" he didnt mean that as >>> I think he already knows that is not true. However its lines like that that >>> make the newspapers and the courts.... which Is one reason why words like >>> "unfortunate" and other underestimations can be useful. As it is I think >>> that some have used words that overestimate the problems and I'm having >>> difficulty in thinking thats this is not accidental. >>> >>> I don't intend to defend my statement line by line. It isnt meant to be >>> a vindification. Its meant to be informative to those people who are >>> interested in my understanding of what went on. I don't mention that I gave >>> so much free time to get a tear but to avoid some people thinking that this >>> was a plan driven by money. (If it is then its a poor plan) >>> >>> One can always blame poor communication but we (WMUK) were trying our >>> best to be transparent and as far as I can see all information that is >>> being discovered was always available. You can always argue that it wasnt >>> well advertised but I'm not sure that we could have done more (in some >>> cases) than issue a press release about me standing down as chair because I >>> was working for MCC or that the Government of Gibraltar was funding >>> Gibraltarpedia with Roger and John as assistants. WMUK were being informed >>> and they were reacting to these events to try and ensure that the situation >>> was understood and properly managed. >>> >>> So for example wrt imperfect communication I didn't read Tom's breakdown >>> until now, and for that I apologise. If someone wants a particular point >>> addressing then do feel free to email me direct. >>> >>> Roger >>> >>> >>> >>> On 29 September 2012 22:58, Thomas Morton >>> <morton.tho...@googlemail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> On 29 September 2012 22:57, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 29 September 2012 22:55, Thomas Morton < >>>>> morton.tho...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >> review, to make sure we are doing enough to safeguard the >>>>> reputation of not >>>>> >> only ourselves as a charity but the Wikimedia movement as a whole. >>>>> >>>>> > Chis, I would hope it has nothing to to with reputation! And >>>>> everything to >>>>> > do with doing things properly and with correct ethics. >>>>> > Reputation won't be a concern in those circumstances! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The decision appears to be everything to do with reputation. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes. My point precisely. >>>> >>>> Tom >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Wikimedia UK mailing list >>>> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org >>>> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l >>>> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Roger Bamkin >>> Victuallers Ltd >>> 01332 702993 >>> 0758 2020815 >>> Google+:Victuallers >>> Skype:Victuallers1 >>> Flickr:Victuallers2 >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikimedia UK mailing list >>> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org >>> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l >>> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia UK mailing list >> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org >> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l >> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org >> >> > > > -- > Roger Bamkin > Victuallers Ltd > 01332 702993 > 0758 2020815 > Google+:Victuallers > Skype:Victuallers1 > Flickr:Victuallers2 > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > >
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
