Hoi, The arguments why it would be a good thing to have a Wikinews organisation have not been refuted. There are some issues that make the issue complicated. The notion that people who are NOT working on Wikinews could also get an "accreditation" is what makes me uncomfortable about the whole issue.
When you need "widespread" support to get things done/organised to get things done it will mean that things do not happen. There are always people who only know to see why not other people are not involved and consequently are not heard. What is needed is people championing the cause who invests time and effort in it.
It is also not necessarily by continuously talking on a list that you make things happen .. :)
Thanks, GerardM
PS I do appreciate the reason for a Wikinews organisation. :)
On 9/2/07, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Brian McNeil wrote:
Is there any progress on what we're going to end up doing for this
issue?
I'm not totally clear on the situation, one of the ideas bandied about
was
that we fundraise for a member of staff to handle Wikinews-related
issues
such as accreditation and credential verification.
I've also not seen anything totally clear yet about the issuing of press passes by the office. Has it been cleared up that this can be done
without
serious liability issues?
My impression is that widespread support for these measures does not exist. That may also explain why the thread has fallen silent.
Ec
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l