Talk:Reports 7Dec13: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Confidential?) |
(+1 There is a problem here with openness) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Confidential? == | == Confidential? == | ||
It's disappointing to see how many of these reports are confidential. :-( I was particularly interested to see the grants report, given my involvement in the past with that work, and obviously I would like to be able to see the living paths report given my involvement in the steering group of that project. Please could these reports be made public? Thanks. [[User:Mike Peel|Mike Peel]] ([[User talk:Mike Peel|talk]]) 23:47, 5 December 2013 (UTC) | It's disappointing to see how many of these reports are confidential. :-( I was particularly interested to see the grants report, given my involvement in the past with that work, and obviously I would like to be able to see the living paths report given my involvement in the steering group of that project. Please could these reports be made public? Thanks. [[User:Mike Peel|Mike Peel]] ([[User talk:Mike Peel|talk]]) 23:47, 5 December 2013 (UTC) | ||
:I have highlighted '''12''' reports as "confidential".[https://wikimedia.org.uk/w/index.php?title=Reports_7Dec13&diff=48460&oldid=48305] It should be blatantly obvious to the board of trustees that '''when half of the reports going to the board from operations are held in secret''', this is no longer an "open" board meeting and the charity has failed to meet the value of openness that is written into the [[Mission]] ('''"To be transparent and open"'''). Thanks --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 04:40, 6 December 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 05:40, 6 December 2013
Confidential?
It's disappointing to see how many of these reports are confidential. :-( I was particularly interested to see the grants report, given my involvement in the past with that work, and obviously I would like to be able to see the living paths report given my involvement in the steering group of that project. Please could these reports be made public? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 23:47, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
- I have highlighted 12 reports as "confidential".[1] It should be blatantly obvious to the board of trustees that when half of the reports going to the board from operations are held in secret, this is no longer an "open" board meeting and the charity has failed to meet the value of openness that is written into the Mission ("To be transparent and open"). Thanks --Fæ (talk) 04:40, 6 December 2013 (UTC)