Jesse Martin (Pathoschild <pathoschild@...> writes:
David Gerard <dgerard@...> wrote:
Yeah, but the policy was pulled from the language committee's backside.
I'm not sure what you're suggesting. Should we revert to the pre-subcommittee policy
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages?oldid=474152#Information?
Essentially, the policy was "list your request below, achieve consensus in a vote, and poke developers yourself until they (maybe) create it."
If you agree that the current policy is better than the previous policy, it doesn't matter whose backside it was pulled from. The community is actively discussing what to change, so the policy is not decided solely by a black-box cabal.
Furthermore, most of the policy was not written by the subcommittee. It was proposed through the community in November 2006: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Language_subcommittee/2007#Reform. This was at a time when discussion occurred directly on the page, so the proposal popped up on virtually every requester's watchlist. It was eventually implemented with no opposition, and months later adopted and amended by the subcommittee.
Sorry to come along late but I think a correction is needed here: so far as I can discover, the exclusion of ancient languages was not proposed through the community and was not discussed by the subcommittee. I could find no record that the amendment by which it was introduced was even noticed by the subcommittee. Please correct me if I'm wrong here!
Andrew Dalby