[foundation-l added back to cc: as well as commons-l]
2009/6/15 Gnangarra <gnangarra(a)gmail.com>:
> Sysops on Commons arent just handed the tools they first must seek a level
> of trust from the community that trust is because there are times when a
> person must act in the interest of Commons. As a long term sysop on Commons
> and one the higher end contributors sysops do have a level of authority and
> need to exercise their judgement more frequently without discussion then
> other larger projects (like de,en) one the problems is that at times there
> arent the experienced people around to enable a thorough discussion before
> acting.
> This is a particluar problem with local copyright issues as an Australian I
> got a good understand of OZ law and know where to get more info, I also
> gained a fair understanding of US over time and out of necessity but I have
> a very limited smattering of it for elsewhere when there is the necessity to
> make a move if I cant get independent opinions/help then I would defer to
> safest solution for Commons
Yeah. The problem is that to be an admin on Commons requires you to be
a copyright law edge-cases nerd way beyond the point where any
reasonable person would just say "bugger it, just sue me." And the
persistence to deal with, what is it, 10%? of uploads being
unacceptable for one reason or another.
So you'll get people - and it's fewer and fewer - who tend to be
interested in Commons as a standalone project and are
indifferent-to-hostile to the service project angle.
The bureaucratic obstructionism - not active hindering (well, maybe
just a bit), just passive not-caring - accorded the recent Pikiwiki
problems is a perfect recent example.
Possible solution: active recruitment drive on client wikis of
underrepresented languages. Get interested sysops on those wikis to go
through suitable training to become Commons.
This requires setting out precisely what a Commons admin needs to
know. Establish clear and somewhat objective criteria for Commons
admins.
- d.