[Foundation-l] Reflections on the recent debates

Sun May 9 00:17:32 UTC 2010

On 5/9/10 1:42 AM, Svip wrote:
> On 9 May 2010 01:01, Florence Devouard<Anthere9 at yahoo.com>  wrote:
>
>> On 5/8/10 7:31 PM, Mike Godwin wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not defending such a criterion, and I do not believe that such a
>>> criterion informed Jimmy's actions. Jimmy can speak better than I can on
>>> what he was thinking,
>>
>> Then let him speak by himself
>
> I think most of us would be biased to hear him speak (well,
> metaphorically).  I too am guilty of such, by ignoring advice (even if
> good and useful) simply because of who the speaker is.
>
> Now, I would expect any public figure like Jimmy Wales to get a bit of
> shit thrown at him occasionally, even from his own ranks.  But I have
> to say, the tone has been far away from professional here and there.
> So letting Godwin speaking on his behalf makes sense.

Besides the fact Mike is using a language far too convoluted for many 
speakers on this list, I would argue that one of the implications of the 
abusive deletions is that Jimbo is perceived as having "lost touch with 
base". I do not think letting someone speak on his behalf will help 
restore trust.

> It's a fresh new approach to the discussion, because we are not
> immediately biased by it being Wales speaking.
>
> And not to mention that Godwin has a point; this was an opportunity in
> disguise.  And unfortunately, in retrospect, this wasn't really picked
> up by the community, instead it turned into another 'fight the power'
> rebellion.
>
> I do not condone Wales' methods of handling the whole situation (hell,
> I am not sure how good he is at PR!), but that is a minor issue, but
> since of course it becomes the classic 'tyrant' in action, people
> focuses on the small 'controversial' things.  Opportunists, I suppose.

Opportunists.... hmmm, I am not convinced.
But maybe is it fair to remind that the original vote to support removal 
of founder flag was NOT started because of the porn image story, but was 
started because of ANOTHER ISSUE (Wikiversity) that took place less than 
two months ago.
In the French speaking world, editors have another grunge against WMF 
because of the deletion of all this content on the French Wikisource a 
few months ago, with the argument that it was *maybe* illegal under 
French Law.
So, it may be that the issues individually taken are small. All together...

> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>