On 10/07/14 18:01, David Gerard wrote:
On 10 July 2014 17:36, Isarra Yos zhorishna@gmail.com wrote:
And those who do log in, edit, and comment on RfCs generally do so with the understanding, on some level, that everything they do, that the entire encyclopedia, is for the readers, because without an audience there would be nothing. They know their audience, they interact directly with this audience on the talkpages and in email, and indeed they often use the site exactly as this audience would, simply taking things a step further to edit as well. So when they speak for the users who never log in, never edit, and never comment, do not discount them. No more than you discount yourself when you try to speak for the users who never log in, never edit, and never comment.
OTOH, typical mind fallacy is rampant everywhere and the results of an actual decent user survey would probably surprise everyone.
- d.
That was kind of my point - as much as editors do tend deal more directly with the readers, we've basically got two (rather biased) sides who both think they know what readers want and thus try to speak for them. This may not even be an issue, by itself, but unfortunately it's becoming a rather common tactic among some WMF staff to simply dismiss community feedback saying things like that the editors simply don't speak for the readers. But if this is really the case, what gives the WMF the right to speak for the readers either?
Personally I'm getting rather tired of this.
-I