Charlotte Webb wrote:
On 10/26/07, RLS <evendell(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Out of curiosity, was this discussed or presented
to the community at
large before a decision was made?
Hopefully you realize any such discussion would reach a perpetual
stalemate, and nothing would ever happen. And then the explicit "lack
of consensus" would be used as an argument against any "let's just be
bold and try it" maneuvers, even by people a handful of people who
would otherwise support such an action. There has to be a word for
this phenomenon, but I can't find it at the moment.
I wasn't trying to assert any view on the productivity of such a
discussion. Rather, it was a roundabout way of saying "you know, this
is why people think there's a cabal." Those who are paranoid about that
sort of thing would have had a field day with GM's original message, and
probably wouldn't have paid any attention to the ensuing discussion that
he felt this was the most effective way to get action started, and that
no "cabalized" decision had been made.
If one were concerned about en.wp's culture *appearing* open to everyone
to participate in the decision-making process, one wouldn't present
proposals that way. That's all.
--Darkwind