On Dec 20, 2007 7:26 AM, Grease Monkee <welloiledmachine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Dec 20, 2007 12:36 AM, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 20/12/2007, Brian Salter-Duke
<b_duke(a)bigpond.net.au> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 11:18:56PM -0800, Grease
Monkee wrote:
> Wikipedia should be doing what Veropedia
is doing. It's not a new
> idea. I think Mav suggested (like five years ago, or something)
using
> the Nupedia domain for exactly that.
Why was it not done? We have talked about stable
versions for too
long.
We should be doing it or supporting veropedia
doing it.
It got lost in endless talking, as far as I recall.
- d.
Oh come on, David. You know as well as I do that when the "wheels" want
something done it gets done, like oversite or checkuser. And when they don't
feel like doing doing something they see to it that the community "talks"
until the cows come home. You can't blame this on the community engaging in
"endless talking", as there is no other initiative that has such widespread
consensus. This is a failure of leadership to honor the will of the
community, nothing more.
Expanding on this a little more: proposals that reduce transparency and
enhance control over individual editors seem to happen with no problema,
like checkuser, oversite and the admin irc channel (proposed right here on
this list).
But the really important things like stable versions ...
As an aside ... one of the things that companies and governments do to
rejuvenate themselves is to create internal forks that compete with
eachother in various ways. These can be small and limited in scope but still
have a tremendous effect. That's one of the angles that could be designed
into Mav's idea.