------------------------------
Message: 7 Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 13:05:37 +0100 From: Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Show community consensus for Wikilove To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: <CAO53wxVzz79KghtsAQe=YSacVtEL5XQuqfgA9nKt+2=w1XUTLg@mail.gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Hoi, There are a few issues:
- the choice of what is going to be developed is very much a management
issue; what gets priority and why
- there are always people who object to any project because they are of
the opinion that something else should be considered to be more relevant
- when something is developed FOR a specific project, giving that
project the option to opt out once it is developed defeats the objective of the functionality; such a decision is very much taken at the start of the project
- I know that a thread like this is read. Good proposals are considered
when they stand out as such. Personally I like the notion of leaving a message as the first option..
- I positively hate talk pages, prefer not to use them. I am a seasoned
Wikimedian and when people like me are this negative about talk pages, then the notion that they are good / usable / can be left alone is suspect.
- have you considered that many of the advanced functionalities used in
the English Wikipedia are actually REALLY problematic in other languages
- ease of use, even dumbing down is in my opinion acceptable when this
grows our editor community in our projects other then the English Wikipedia
- I am known for my hobby horses; working for the "Localisation team"
allows me to be part of much good work. However, there are still many things that are not going to be developed any time soon that I rate highly
Thanks, GerardM
Hoi Gerard,
Well spoken. "the choice of what is going to be developed is very much a management issue" or at least it is where that development is paid for as opposed to done by volunteers. So whether that choice is made by the community or by the Foundation is not only important because the community would probably make better decisions about the relative priority of various potential developments. Ultimately this is about whether the community self manages where that works and uses the Foundation where that doesn't. Or whether the Foundation manages the community, but allows some limited local discretion.
WereSpielChequers
Hoi, You are missing the point completely as far as I am concerned. The community was involved in defining our strategy. Making our community more friendly is a strategic choice defined by the strategy project and endorsed by the board.
I doubt very much that one of our many communities has the ability to consider what is good for all of us. The notion of community self management is in stark conflict to the reality that there are over 270 language communities for Wikipedia alone. The distribution of growth is very much against the English Wikipedia community even though there is still a lot of information lacking. The format of its content is arguably very brainy and not really suited for reading on mobile phones.
It is very much like Commons, it is a place where you are free to add media files but its utility as a resource is retarded. I blogged about it, Michael Snow presented about it at Wikimania. No single (language) community exists that will take this up.
Why do you think this is? Our aim is to provide information but we do not consider the best format, Our aim is to provide freely licensed media files but we do not consider its usability.
We bicker about Wikilove and relate it to community self management. Are the needs of one community crucial or are we to consider what best realises what our aim is ? Thanks, GerardM
On 30 October 2011 13:33, WereSpielChequers werespielchequers@gmail.comwrote:
Message: 7 Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 13:05:37 +0100 From: Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Show community consensus for Wikilove To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: <CAO53wxVzz79KghtsAQe=YSacVtEL5XQuqfgA9nKt+2=
w1XUTLg@mail.gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Hoi, There are a few issues:
- the choice of what is going to be developed is very much a management
issue; what gets priority and why
- there are always people who object to any project because they are of
the opinion that something else should be considered to be more
relevant
- when something is developed FOR a specific project, giving that
project the option to opt out once it is developed defeats the
objective
of the functionality; such a decision is very much taken at the start of
the
project
- I know that a thread like this is read. Good proposals are considered
when they stand out as such. Personally I like the notion of leaving a message as the first option..
- I positively hate talk pages, prefer not to use them. I am a seasoned
Wikimedian and when people like me are this negative about talk pages, then the notion that they are good / usable / can be left alone is suspect.
- have you considered that many of the advanced functionalities used in
the English Wikipedia are actually REALLY problematic in other
languages
- ease of use, even dumbing down is in my opinion acceptable when this
grows our editor community in our projects other then the English Wikipedia
- I am known for my hobby horses; working for the "Localisation team"
allows me to be part of much good work. However, there are still many things that are not going to be developed any time soon that I rate highly
Thanks, GerardM
Hoi Gerard,
Well spoken. "the choice of what is going to be developed is very much a management issue" or at least it is where that development is paid for as opposed to done by volunteers. So whether that choice is made by the community or by the Foundation is not only important because the community would probably make better decisions about the relative priority of various potential developments. Ultimately this is about whether the community self manages where that works and uses the Foundation where that doesn't. Or whether the Foundation manages the community, but allows some limited local discretion.
WereSpielChequers _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org