Marc Riddell wrote:
on 6/23/07 3:39 AM, David Goodman wrote:
I see a structure--a cellular structure of groups that only sometimes interact. If the group is reasonably small, under 50 or so--of whom in general 5 to 10 will actually be active, and if the interfaces between the groups are kept limited and channelized, the organization can continue. The cells I have in mind are he Wikiprojects. Many of them work really well to maintain order in their work (I'm thinking particularly of Chemistry) and are reasonably hospitable to adequately informed newcomers. But they work only incidentally with the other groups. they appear in the general forums when something of critical concern to them appears, but otherwise they leave the rest of the wiki alone. Look at most of the admin candidates--they have each of them contributed substantially only within a scope of a few pages. When the become admins, they do a little general activity, but most remain fairly limited even in that. They are like the country members, who come to the capitol only on special occasion.
David,
Another area to think about are the frustratingly complex processes of conflict appeal and resolution; both within the various Projects and in the encyclopedia as a whole. As it is now a newbie, in particular, doesn't stand a chance.
While you are absolutely right that it is an area in need of reform, I think too that it is more important to focus on what happens when things go right than on what to do when things go wrong. This does not diminish the importance of these processes, but they do have a tendency to draw people's attention away from fundamental objectives. This is akin to a community that wants to build better jails instead of better schools.
In the recent discussion on the use of proxies it was argued that strong measures should be taken because it was conceived that wrong-doers _could_ avail themselves of potential security holes. A tremendous amount of energy could be devoted to that sort of thing, and leave us very little further ahead. Problem people can only be dealt with by reference to what we accept as right.
Maybe we need a Wikiproject:Discipline along the lines of other Wikiprojects, but I'm not prepared to say that that's the only way to go with this. Whatever is done in this direction must still fit in with a broader picture where it must also be accountable.
Ec