On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Marc A. Pelletier marc@uberbox.org wrote:
On 16-03-14 10:33 AM, Steinsplitter Wiki wrote:
Per commons Policy's the RFC is valid.
Then the policy is broken. It seems more than a little insane to me that an opinion poll having had participation of a few % of a small community (active commons users) can make a binding decision for an entirely disjoint community many hundred times it size with neither participation nor even consultation.
At the very least, the opinion of logged out users should be sought or at least vaguely estimated in some manner (I can think of several easy client-side ways of doing a quick opinion poll of at least a sample of them; or a couple of metrics giving hints).
That RfC is akin to asking the print newspaper owners about making new rules for all web sites. While I've no doubt that their collective opinions would be very good for them, I'd like something a bit more objective. :-)
-- Coren / Marc
Marc, that is how the policies work all over. Non-editing readers have generally (with some exceptions) not participated in the crafting or revision of policies or consensus-based decision-making. Anyone who thinks the reader perspective hasn't been adequately considered should contribute that point of view to the discussion, but the non-participation of non-participants can't render all decisions invalid.