[Foundation-l] How to dismantle a language committee

[Milos Rancic]

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 1:04 AM, Tomasz Ganicz <polimerek at gmail.com> wrote:
> I did't want to come back to Belarus Wikipedia case, but at that time
> I have found quite easily 2 good experts. One from Univ. of Warsaw,
> vice-head o Belaruss literature department and one from Univ of Oxford
> (an emeritus professor, specializing in Belaruss politics and
> history). It wasn't very difficulit to ask them and get the answers -
> quite long and IMHO quite professional.I asked at that time if there
> is any interst for LangComm in reading this. The answer was "no", as
> at that time the decission was already taken, the situation was quite
> hot and arguments showing that the decission wasn't so clever were not
> listen simply by default. The stinky egg was already broken and
> members of LangComm were simply trying not to smell it :-)
>
> I don't think that such kind of experts good in one case only should
> be members of LangComm. It probably doesn't make sense. But it does
> make sense to find them for specific purposes and then ask questions
> before making final decission. It can be done. Most of them give you
> an answer or at least point you to the places you can find it itself.
> LangComm should consist of the people who are clever enough to ask
> relevant questions and be able to understand and analyse the asnwers.

Yes, this is a good point. As far as I am introduced, this is
LangCom's practice for a longer period of time. But, it is good to
organize those contacts.

I also agree with your point related to LangCom members profile. But,
it is also good to have in-house solution for regular issues (and we
have it now).