You're right that WF is attacked and operates as a public resource which makes it a target. But that means they also need to be held accountable by sympathetic forces because a fortress mentality can easily emerge.

Unions have few friends in power, so we can assume this is not a false flag by WFs enemies. Nobody is forcing Jimmy Wales to put his name to a union-busting sentiment. Let's examine it:

> I want a process where staff are safe to deliberate in the privacy of their own minds and make the decision based on all the available evidence that makes the most sense to them. So I don't think insisting on a proper vote is process for the sake of process and I say that with my own estimate that the staff will vote to support unionization. I think we'll be in a better place if it's really clear - a clean and clear choice with no chance of pressure.

If he really believes they will vote for unionization then why would he insinuate that there will be some nefarious "pressure" applied by volunteer organizers? Blocking an outcome he claims to expect because he wants workers to be "safe": remember, workers are organizing precisely because they don't feel "safe" with management.