Tim Starling wrote:
Arbeo M wrote:
I've stated my position on new language wikis, and we've been through
all the arguments before. Just because I'm no longer interested in
arguing every case, or putting my name on the oppose votes, doesn't mean
I've changed my mind.
It's sad that a tech savvy person can't devise a bot to automatically
place a no vote whenever any of these questions come up. :-)
The problem with voting on the matter is that it is a
vote to expand the
community. It should come as no surprise that those people who are on
the outside are voting to be on the inside. As I've previously said, we
should judge the value of a wiki by the number of readers, and by the
information it brings to those readers, not by the number of editors.
An interesting and important point! That some action will drive away
editors is a classic argument around here. Certainly some who
consistently lose votes will be driven away. (Is that so bad?) Whether
that harms the overall project is a matter of speculation, since no-one
has over provided evidence to back that up.
I tired of the
repetitive debate long ago, so I'm happy to consider the current set of
languages sufficient. Hopefully if there's any really important
languages that we've missed, a Board member will let me know.
If we spend all our time making sure that we have expressed ourselves on
every vote nothing else would be accomplished. Therein lies the biggest
problem in any voting process.
>I was just wondering if somebody
>has an idea how we could remedy this situation and
>maybe have, like, one new WP per month (so we don't
>lose too many potential new contributors)?
The way some people around here read rules that would soon be taken as
meaning that one new WP per month would be mandatory.
If those potential new contributors only want to write
articles in some
little-known conlang, I won't shed any tears if they stay away.
There will be very few wet eyes in the crowd.