David Gerard wrote:
Can anyone think how to rephrase this better? Would it
through to anyone who needs to hear it?
(I eagerly await all the people saying I should read what I wrote.)
These are the things we do that aren't actually codified. The feel of
the project. The social structure. This stuff is process too, but if
you contradict it you'll really upset people. Breaking a rule is just
breaking a rule; but breaking a cultural expectation is breaking
people's basic assumptions about the fabric of this small world of
ours. And upset volunteers fade away.
If you think you're keeping to the fundamental rules and the sensible
processes but repeatedly upset people in the same way, your approach
is ineffective. If you are in fact right, and cultural expectations
are getting in the way of writing the encyclopedia, you've got a hard
job ahead of you changing them. But that's the trouble with vision.
Regretably, those who most desparately need to understand this, are the
ones least capable of it. For them it needs to be put in the form of a
rule, often one with punitive consequences for failure to adhere to it.
Perhaps being blocked for upsetting some number of people in the same
way despite being technically correct according to the literal rules.
Vision is great, but it requires being able to see beyond the rules. It
requires being able to see where the rules are likely to interfere with