Erik Moeller wrote:
On 11/15/06, Titoxd@Wikimedia
<titoxd.wikimedia(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Personally, I dislike the new vision statement.
The older one had the exact
same meaning, and was much "catchier"; the current proposal sounds too
corporate.
There were two primary reasons for the changes:
1) We're not only about access, but also about participation. A
read-only wiki is not very interesting. We saw "share in" as a phrase
that could transport many meanings.
Nod. If you can come up with another way of expression that "share in",
it will be interesting to look at.
But the big change indeed is an attempt to reflect the reality of what
WE are trying to do.
We are not seeking only to feed the world with
information/knowledge/content; we are also collecting and organising
this knowledge. And the collection is not restricted to a happy few, but
is an open and collaborative process.
2) Florence and I saw "That's what we're
doing" as potentially
misleading for such an ambitious claim. Given how fucked up the
situation still is in much of the developing world, we need to be
careful not to come across as pretentious.
yup.
Ant