Andrew said:
Having this preliminary council be much larger is just going to add complexity to the whole process.
And I couldn't agree more. Until "what this council does" is defined, it's hard to decide anything as a large group. This is precisely why this proposal has never moved this far forward before, is because there are too many people discussing it. This touches on a minor scalability flaw with doing things by "consensus," but I digress.
Hopefully, a small group tasked with this can produce results where the wider community cannot. In a sense, I see a comparison with the elections committee. If the entire community were tasked with things such as suffrage, entry requirements, etc., the elections wouldn't happen on a timely scale. Same with this Wikicouncil.
-Chad
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 9:12 AM, Andrew Whitworth wknight8111@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Dan Rosenthal swatjester@gmail.com wrote:
I disagree, I think that this council (the provisional one) should be larger, regardless of whether the final council's size is adjusted or not.
I'm under the impression, mistaken as it may be, that the role of this council is small. we're going to be looking to set things like the size and composition of the final council. We are going to determine the specifics of how a council should operate, set up the first "elections" or whatever for members, and then we are done.
Having this preliminary council be much larger is just going to add complexity to the whole process. The faster we answer the relevant problems, the faster we can install a true representative council. I'm highly interested in project diversity, and I'm also highly sympathetic to Gerard M's goals of language diversity as well. If these things can be satisified in a reasonable way, we all win. If not, maybe it will not be worthwhile for us to create a wikicouncil in the first place.
--Andrew Whitworth
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l