Hi,
Again, Steven (not a LangCom member, and policy says the proposal has to
come from a LangCom member) proposed to reject the project based on his own
personal --not supported by policy-- personal opinion and ignoring
consensus to close the project in the PCP page.
Let's assume in areas of not being utterly bureaucratic that the clerk can
formulate such proposal to the committee. Gerard, after asking few
questions, supported the closure (effectively objecting Steven's proposal).
Nobody said anything else. As things stand, the proposal to reject was
rejected as it didn't had any quorum here, silence not being enough.
Therefore the PCP has to remain open or a new proposal put forward this
committee.
Policy is policy and we're suposed to follow it.
Regards, M.
2018-04-10 21:03 GMT+02:00 Oliver Stegen <oliver_stegen(a)sil.org>rg>:
Not so - Steven's proposal on April 2 was to
*reject* the proposal for
closure. I didn't oppose Steven's proposal as I was happy to keep it open.
Fwiw,
Oliver
On 10-Apr-18 18:40, MarcoAurelio wrote:
If so there has been unanimous consensus to close, as Gerard supported and
no one opposed. Thanks, M.
El El mar, 10 abr 2018 a las 15:48, Steven White <Koala19890(a)hotmail.com>
escribió:
> Marco, with due respect, I first posted a notice on this on March 19. I
> let it run until April 2. Up to that point, the only member of LangCom
> (other than me) who had commented substantively was Gerard. Then on April 2
> I announced that if I didn't hear anything else from anyone in another
> week, I was going to close as rejected. And I heard nothing else, even from
> Gerard. So on April 9 I marked as rejected. That fulfilled all requirement
> of the current voting policy.
>
>
> Frankly, I wish more members of the Committee would take a more active
> role in discussions. But I am trying very hard not to allow requests to
> back up, and to work through backlogs. So as long as all requirements of
> policy have been met, I will continue to move things along.
>
>
> Steven
>
>
> Sent from Outlook <http://aka.ms/weboutlook>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Langcom <langcom-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org> on behalf of
> langcom-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org <langcom-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 10, 2018 8:00 AM
> *To:* langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> *Subject:* Langcom Digest, Vol 55, Issue 9
>
> Send Langcom mailing list submissions to
> langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>
https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Flists.wikimedia.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%
> 2Flangcom&data=02%7C01%7C%7C57857d893a0048091e6808d59edabbba%
> 7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636589584646177925&sdata=
> 8eKULGE1sOMGx5UXaGByVCGx09a7CGO6DWv9MtK3kbw%3D&reserved=0
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> langcom-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> langcom-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Langcom digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Several updates (MarcoAurelio)
> 2. Re: Approval for Santali Wikipedia (Michael Everson)
> 3. Open Wikipedia requests dating to 2011 (fifth and final set)
> (Steven White)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 22:28:39 +0200
> From: MarcoAurelio <strigiwm(a)gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee
> <langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Langcom] Several updates
> Message-ID:
> <CA+DRDAauKMKWhEYz6mMrz0_ow58FHELjOQKBb0U4XY=MnP5NmA@
> mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>
> Hi,
>
> >
> > Rejecting request to close Malagasy Wikibooks—comment by only one
> LangCom
> member is not sufficient to constitute consensus to close a project that
> has no violatons of fundamental rules
> >
>
> Sorry but I find this rather innapropriate and contrary to LangCom voting
> rules as stated at: <
>
https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fmeta.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FLanguage_
> committee%2FVoting_policy&data=02%7C01%7C%7C57857d893a0048091e6808d59eda
> bbba%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%
> 7C636589584646177925&sdata=jjM1Wdz7W1Jj5KjF%2BXSD%
> 2BbmWbwtbyX5czOknGsv1GQs%3D&reserved=0> and the
>
> closure of projects policy decision policy <
>
https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fmeta.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FClosing_projects_
> policy%23Decision&data=02%7C01%7C%7C57857d893a0048091e6808d59edabbba%
> 7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636589584646177925&sdata=
> ChBxgo77hyK0Hp3WfOxEv22YQS9KiV8pqAELqkfFKFw%3D&reserved=0>.
>
>
> There has to be a proposal comming from a LangCom member, announced on
> this
> list and to the community, and thereafter a voting has to take place, with
> the Board holding ultimate vetoing power.
>
> None of such steps have been taken.
>
> The decision should be reversed as being done against policy.
>
> Thanks, M.
>