Sheldon Rampton a écrit:
(1) Have Jimbo appoint a governing committee. This would inevitably be a non-representative subset of the entire community, but having Jimbo as our benevolent dictator is also non-representative. The advantage of a governing committee is that it could be SOMEWHAT more representative of the entire committee than just Jimbo by himself, and it could also take some of the work off his shoulders.
For a healthy place, no cumulation of "power" should exist. An arbitrator should not be in the government. Nor a "honorary developer" (the one sysops, desysoping people). Separation of power is best.
(2) Establish a voting system, through which a large subset of the entire Wikipedia community is authorized to vote. Obviously we'll need some way to exclude spam-voting by anonymous abusers, but if we gave a vote to everyone who has supplied a unique and verified email address, that would be a close enough approximation to universal enfranchisement for practical purposes.
Each time we voted, it was clear enough that the little noise that could be brought by vandals was cancelled by all the good contributors.
(3) Use the voting system to create a "parliament" of elected representatives, whose members are charged with setting policies on behalf of the entire community.
I disagree with this.
(4) Alternately, we could try to develop a system of "policy juries," through which everyone occasionally gets asked at random to participate in policy decisions. For a discussion of how policy juries work, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarchy
--Sheldon Rampton
Better. I also like the idea to do the same with arbitrators (like a jury)...and with sysops :-)