[foundation-l added back to cc: as well as commons-l]
2009/6/15 Gnangarra <gnangarra(a)gmail.com>om>:
Sysops on Commons arent just handed the tools they
first must seek a level
of trust from the community that trust is because there are times when a
person must act in the interest of Commons. As a long term sysop on Commons
and one the higher end contributors sysops do have a level of authority and
need to exercise their judgement more frequently without discussion then
other larger projects (like de,en) one the problems is that at times there
arent the experienced people around to enable a thorough discussion before
This is a particluar problem with local copyright issues as an Australian I
got a good understand of OZ law and know where to get more info, I also
gained a fair understanding of US over time and out of necessity but I have
a very limited smattering of it for elsewhere when there is the necessity to
make a move if I cant get independent opinions/help then I would defer to
safest solution for Commons
Yeah. The problem is that to be an admin on Commons requires you to be
a copyright law edge-cases nerd way beyond the point where any
reasonable person would just say "bugger it, just sue me." And the
persistence to deal with, what is it, 10%? of uploads being
unacceptable for one reason or another.
So you'll get people - and it's fewer and fewer - who tend to be
interested in Commons as a standalone project and are
indifferent-to-hostile to the service project angle.
The bureaucratic obstructionism - not active hindering (well, maybe
just a bit), just passive not-caring - accorded the recent Pikiwiki
problems is a perfect recent example.
Possible solution: active recruitment drive on client wikis of
underrepresented languages. Get interested sysops on those wikis to go
through suitable training to become Commons.
This requires setting out precisely what a Commons admin needs to
know. Establish clear and somewhat objective criteria for Commons