Robert Rohde wrote:
On Jan 9, 2008 3:16 PM, Andrew Whitworth wknight8111@gmail.com wrote:
I would disagree. In general, many members of the sister projects have a strong sense of disconnect and disenfranchisement when it comes to the WMF. This is especially true of the smaller projects and the smaller non-english projects. The lines of communication are virtually non-existant for these small projects. If it appears that the only time the WMF cares about a small project is when something is wrong and "action" needs to be taken.
While it may be worse for small and non-english projects, I think many participants in many of the larger projects also feel disconnected with WMF. Project participants are usually there because they enjoy creating something, but from the point of view of project participants the WMF is almost never directly involved in creating anything. The WMF mostly provides a behind-the-scenes service to keep the servers running, and many people would be perfectly happy if the WMF never, ever got involved in the governance of individual projects. When the WMF does get involved, many participants wonder: "Why are you messing with MY work."
It would be unwieldy for WikiCouncil to have representatives from each and every project, given that in a one-admin project that person may have his hands full just keeping that project going. WikiCouncil will need a ratification policy, even for some of the most obvious policies. If WC (with due note of Jimbo's recent English interview) wants all projects to adopt the Five Pillars it would need to be subject to ratification to avoid the impression that it is nothing more than an en:wp policy being imposed on everyone else.
Ec