I'm surprised to see this question raised here. I raised the same issue on a Wikipedia project talk page & practically had my head handed back to me for it.
I think it is -- or will be -- a problem because of Wikipedia's growth. Once upon a time, everyone on Wikipedia knew who Jimbo was; if you had a problem, you could email him & get a response in a reasonable time. Now the community & the projects have grown, & there are a growing number of active contributors who have at best a vague idea who he is; unless you happen to be someone who is uppermost in his mind, it may take him as long as a month to respond to an email. (This is not a criticism, just a statement of fact: with everything he has a part in, I can understand that some people don't get as much attention as others.)
Due to all of this, I can forsee the day, may as soon as 2-3 years down the road where enough Wikipedians don't know Jimbo, start considering him a troll or a fossil that is limiting Wikipedia -- & stage a coup. (I laid out a vague plan of how it could be attempted on that Talk page, which might work for a few days until someone went to the colo & powered down the servers.) This effort to depose the "God King" (a label I wish had never been coined) would most likely be unsuccessful, but that will rob us of time & energy better spent on our project, & likely alienate a large number of good contributors.
If a formal relationship between the various Wikimedia & Jimbo Wales was defined -- say that he is considered ultimate arbitrator of all disputes -- it would head off that potential problem. I think that statement fairly describes the status quo, & gives him no powers that he doesn't currently have. And if, years down the road, many Wikipedians don't like that relationship, it would lead them to seek a change by negotiation -- not a coup.
Of course, Jimbo's best solution for dealing with the growing distance between him & the average Wikipedian is to travel & meet more -- which he is doing. But Jimbo is one person, life is short, & the number of Wikimedians is great. Defining his relationship with (at least) en.wikipedia would give him more time to continue this work.
Geoff
On 3/21/07, Geoffrey Burling llywrch@agora.rdrop.com wrote:
I'm surprised to see this question raised here. I raised the same issue on a Wikipedia project talk page & practically had my head handed back to me for it.
Thats because you didn't approach the matter properly: with enough sarcasm and facetiousness to drown a horse, understanding of course Jimbo's good natured consideration for what people think, and his ability to read between the lines.
-Stevertigo
Geoffrey Burling wrote:
Of course, Jimbo's best solution for dealing with the growing distance between him & the average Wikipedian is to travel & meet more -- which he is doing. But Jimbo is one person, life is short, & the number of Wikimedians is great.
If I was in Jimbo's position and was wanting to improve my understanding of the average Wikipedian, I think a relatively easy way to do it would be to get myself a sock puppet account and do a little editing _as_ an average Wikipedian. I'd try out the things that are the sources of controversy, such as AfD or the use of certain types of sources. Get into disagreements with some average Wikipedians and see what they think policy and standard practice really are. Continuing the monarchy analogy, this would be sort of like the Prince and the Pauper.
Perhaps he already does this. In which case, never mind. :)
On 3/21/07, Bryan Derksen bryan.derksen@shaw.ca wrote:
If I was in Jimbo's position and was wanting to improve my understanding of the average Wikipedian, I think a relatively easy way to do it would be to get myself a sock puppet account and do a little editing _as_ an average Wikipedian. I'd try out the things that are the sources of controversy, such as AfD or the use of certain types of sources. Get into disagreements with some average Wikipedians and see what they think policy and standard practice really are. Continuing the monarchy analogy, this would be sort of like the Prince and the Pauper.
Perhaps he already does this. In which case, never mind. :)
I don't think the issue raised deals with his ability to "understand the average Wikipedian." I dont think he has a problem with that at all. The issues were about clarification of his role (or not), a constitution or a monarchy, and consistent usage of powers, such that we know to consult him when we draft a policy change, and not wait until six months later when he gets a chance to find out about it.
In the current debate over ATT, no other individual could make such unilateral steps as he did without prior consultation and consensus building. The fact that he can is of course a matter which the community wants to more fully understand in a constitutional way, while of course not wanting to be perceived as attacking or criticizing him.
-Stevertigo