On 1/10/08, Mike Godwin mnemonic@gmail.com wrote:
Birgitte writes:
I find this completely off-base. WMF is *becoming* a club now. In the past it was more like a trading center.
I think this criticism of my remark is fair. All analogies fail when you analyze them enough. I do believe that, in some ways, the Wikimedia projects (and the Foundation) were like a club -- now they are less so. I think it is a defensible argument that some people miss the club. Nevertheless, p.rofessionalizing the infrastructure is an important, positive step. ...
I think that I understand about what Gregory and Brigitte talk. Also, it looks to me that after Board's decision about licenses things became much better, thanks to the community's pressure after the decision.
Wikimedian community was a club of people involved in in the projects. During this year it became obvious that it is not such club anymore, which is good.
But, tendencies which are making WMF as a club of Wikimedian leaders which are making a meta-club with other similar clubs -- didn't start yesterday. And this is a problem.
Wikimedian community is *very* different from other free culture communities because it is not a group of geeks who don't want to be included in "some boring things" (like free software and open source movements are), as well as it is not a group of professionals who are communicating between themselves on the professional level.
Our community is much more diverse and much more like any society in the world. Because of that, community members don't want to treat community leaders as "good managers" or "people who made a right thing at the right time", but as a political leaders who need to be good managers, to do the right thing at the right time, but not only that.
I really think that comparing WM community with other free culture communities is a wrong way of thinking. Community similar to Wikimedian didn't happen in the history and people who are in the position to lead it have to be very creative and extremely careful in building its future. Consequences of doing good and bad job may be similar (while I hope not so drastic) to the consequences of bad job done by League of Nations.
Maybe it may look like a hyperbola, but I really feel that something big is brewing. And it is much better to be more careful then responsible for a disaster.