on 2/23/07 9:14 PM, Ray Saintonge at saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Acknowledging leadership is difficult in a community brought together because it is such a collection of individuals. The individuality is needed to keep the project innovative. Acknowledging leadership means giving up a little power for the greater good, but that requires trust. The world around us gives us cause to not trust any kind of leadership.
Ray,
Talk is no substitute for action, but in a rational society it must exist as a prelude to it.
I came to Wikipedia for the information it provided I stayed because of the people behind it. When you first open it, it¹s like taking a book off the shelf; if you look behind the pages you can see a whole life force in action. This life force consists of people and these people have pride, intelligence and monumental egos (for the most part, healthy ones but egos nonetheless). In post after post I read of these egos colliding. This, in itself, is certainly not the problem if, ultimately, some good comes from it. The problem becomes one, when these collisions result in nothing but name-calling and impasse.
But, as I have said before, there must be a common acknowledgement (yes, consensus) that such problems exist.
I believe there is an acknowledgment of leadership within WP. And, from what I¹ve gathered from various posts, that leadership does have the majority of the Community¹s trust. We need that someone with this trust (and, yes, clout) to say, ³OK gang, there¹s trouble in paradise and we need to deal with it before it starts to resemble that other place.²
I am not suggesting anyone dropped a ball here simply that it is time to acknowledge it and to pick it up.
Yes, it is very hard to build a case in support of the need for leadership, living in the world that we do. As a people we have come up with some real losers! These leaders [insert your own example] have proven more destructive to their people than any enemy could ever have been. But every once in a while a [insert your own example] comes along and proves the great exception to that rule.
Marc Riddell