Is anyone on this list actually using these credentials? That's who needs to be listened to. I would think an accreditation system which has the approval of the board (which doesn't mean the board micromanages it) would be the only useful system anyway. But maybe I'm wrong. Has anyone accomplished anything by saying "yeah, I'm a reporter for some website, you can go to this url and look at a page that anyone in the world can edit, and that proves it"?
On 11/8/05, Amgine amgine@saewyc.net wrote:
foundation-l-request@wikimedia.org wrote:
Why are you mentioning that? That is a strawman due to the fact that I strongly support the scalable approach.
-- mav
Because your argument reduces the scalability.
Perhaps this entire thread could have been presented differently.
Board members? Would it be possible for you to discuss the Wikinews press credentialing process at some point? Currently we use the system in the same way high school and other non-professional journalism organizations do all over the world, but perhaps we should have something more than a tacit approval. One idea would be approval of a phrase such as:
''Wikinews editions may accredit persons according to their policies for the purpose of acting as freelance journalists when reporting on news events for Wikinews."
Would this answer your concerns, Mav? It clearly states the contributors are not representing Wikinews or the Wikimedia Foundation, limits when and how the credentials may be used, but allows the project to develop credentialing policies.
Amgine
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l