Hello Mark,
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 3:38 AM, Delirium<delirium(a)hackish.org> wrote:
I'd personally place myself on the "objecting
to WMF expansion" side, at
least in general sentiment. With larger organizations, you can indeed do
more, but also run more risks. In particular, organizations with large
staffs run the risk of bureaucratization; and community/volunteer-based
organizations with large staffs risk capture of the overall project by
the official organization, rather than the community and volunteers they
ostensibly act as support staff for.
Can you say more about this -- both what more you can do and the
risks run -- and cite the track record[s] you mention? Do you feel
there are similar capacity/risk tradeoffs of larger/more inclusive
communities? (some might say that the current editing community is
becoming an organization separating itself from the general public,
building barriers to participation; and that this [de facto]
organization risks capturing the overall knowledge-sharing project
within existing guidelines and policies, rather than encouraging bold
participation among the wider world, who are the ostensible audience
and body of future contributors.)
Thanks,
Sj
It's not inevitable the outcomes will be bad, but
it's worth thinking
about, I think, especially as the track record of traditional non-profit
organizations overall is quite poor in that department.
-Mark
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l