Mark,
You are a veteran in Wikipedia matters -- you have been involved in this project for several years under nickname "Node ue". You have fought in the Moldovan language article on en.wp for years, and you have single-handedly created and defended the entire mo.wiki project, from interface to content. As such, I am amazed by the number of inconsistencies in your reply:
1. Your wording is inflammatory ("rule-by-mob"), and your point gratuitously infers an ulterior motive on my part; as far as I can tell, there is no reason for such implications. 2. Wikipedia is governed by consensus, wherein the quality of your argument weighs much more than the number of people who hold the same point of view; as such, the rule-by-mob and any similar arguments are moot. 3. Several "interested parties" (such as myself) have been watching this discussion on foundation-l for some time; as long as they had nothing to comment, they kept to themselves -- this is in line with Wikipedia policies regarding tacit consensus. Moving this entire conversation to a private medium equals hiding the decision-making process from the very interested parties it was intended for. You might have not been aware of such silent parties before my message here, but you were replying to the very message which revealed their existence. 4. All of this is public, so far. As such, any "private" medium this conversation could be moved to will be "invaded" by Romanian and Russian "mobs". But there's a significant difference: where silent parties were silent, now they would now have to voice their presence in the new, "private" medium.
Having said the above, please tell me how exactly you see this private decision-making process, from a technical point of view: which medium do you propose? Who would centralize all messages? When would we know we reached consensus, and who would decide that? How would that be proven to the outside world?
Thank you, Gutza
On 12-Oct-10 23:27, M. Williamson wrote:
Gutza, the problem with such a solution is inequality of numbers. Every time this has been discussed previously, such forums have been dominated by Romanians from Romania with very little input from Moldovans and 0 input from Transnistrians. This is unfair and steps should be taken to remedy any systemic bias of this type. Although the solution of Milos of individuals or groups negotiating privately is not ideal, it seems to me better than rule-by-mob in which it will end up, as on the vote for closure of mo.wp, a battle of numbers between Russians and Romanians rather than a discussion of any substance between informed or involved parties with different views.
-m.
2010/10/12 Gutza gutza@moongate.ro:
I've been watching the conversation on this topic from the bench. Milos, this is a highly sensitive issue, you can't tell "private parties" to settle this privately and come back with a solution -- this has to be settled in a public medium (if only for the consensus to be visible). I suggest a page on Meta, e.g. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2010_Decision_on_Moldovan_Wikipedia
Regards, Gutza
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l