Re: [Foundation-l] Re: Cleaning up Wikibooks

Anthere wrote: As I see it this was an example of overreacting with regards to a book on white power that probably should have been deleted. Had Jimbo simply said we need to get rid of this book because it is completely objectionable, and acted accordingly the collateral damage would have been minimal. Some of the other books to which Jimbo objected were already under discussion in the Wikibooks deletion process. One thing to remember is the general attitude of panic that prevails around the English Wikipedia AfD has not taken over on many other projects. This may give the impression of slow country cousins (des paysans simples), but in most cases people reach some kind of arrangement that they can live with. That's well within the spirit of wiki. When someone like Jimbo goes into a project and execises force majeure it needs to be done so as a measured act designed to minimize damage and new confusion. I don't know if the writer of the white power book deserves some kind of serious discipline; I've never had any dealings with him. There is more that can go into such an act that a black and white decision based on one book. The most controversial matter was to unilaterally and arbitrarily change the definition of what books belong on Wikibooks. This would change that definition from any non-fiction book that one might find in a local library to something that is more strictly a "textbook". Unfortunately, "textbook" is not a clear term; it makes the definition of the Wikibooks content less clear, because it interrupts a mutual (even if unwritten) understanding of what is acceptable. Every project develops its own leadership patterns and its own leaders. This is often without any appointments, without any votes, without any titles. Those leaders just lead, often with the tacit support of the community. The community trusts the leader not to take that community into a radical new direction without the consent of the community. That trust allows the leader to take unilateral action in many circumstances, including disputed ones where the only solution lies in an act of decisiveness. Improperly applied force majeure undermines those lines of trust. Contributors who have found an acceptable level of comfort with their work and its acceptability are cast into uncertainty. Some may feel that their perfectly acceptable efforts are now put into doubt. As this project scales up into an unbelievably large volunteer mega-project we need to be attentive to scaling up the human relations that have made Wikipedia what it is today. In the English Wiktionary, the project where I am most active, recently passed the 100,000 entry milestone, and is the ninth largest project. It has double the number of entries that were on Wikipedia when I first joined. The arbitrary interruption of the lines of trust on such a project can have unexpected effects. Ec