Hi,
I am beginning to be confused about the sequence of events when a new feature is introduced. It seems that one or two members of wikitech-l (developers) support a new feature, write the code, put it on test.wikipedia.org and wait for feedback. At times this wait is less than a day. The feature is usually implemented. Then, it is announced or noticed by someone on wikipedia-l, and 60 e-mails follow discussing and arguing over it. If someone has a new feature they want to see implemented, why don't they present it to the whole membership first and then allow a few days for discussion. After everyone has a chance to think about it and raise their objections, modifications, etc, then implement it, if most members want it. Recently, there have been remarks on a number of changes, that it might have been better to have a broader-based discussion, before implementation, when the usual flood of e-mails followed the announcement of a new feature. Just because many members of wikipedia do not have the skills to make such changes, it doesn't mean that they don't have an opinion on them. Tonight I am watching this process proceed on two changes on the edit/preview pages. All discussion is on wikitech-l. It has been suggested that at least one change will probably be implemented tomorrow. Meanwhile, the main membership has no idea that any such change/s are about to happen.
As Ever,
Ruth Ifcher
--
On dim, 2003-01-05 at 21:27, rose.parks@att.net wrote:
Just because many members of wikipedia do not have the skills to make suchchanges, it doesn't mean that they don't have an opinion on them.
Then they should learn to do so or at least actively get involved in the process, just as people who don't like their governments should become active in the political process instead of being passive sheep who can be pushed around.
This isn't a secret shadowy cabal; the developers' list is open to anyone who subscribes, the archives are publicly readable, and changes to the code are a matter of public record in our CVS repository.
'Power to the people' doesn't just _happen_ magically; the people have to make use of their power. First step: sign up for wikitech-l and speak up when you have an opinion!
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Brion Vibber wrote:
Just because many members of wikipedia do not have the skills to make suchchanges, it doesn't mean that they don't have an opinion on them.
Then they should learn to do so or at least actively get involved in the process, just as people who don't like their governments should become active in the political process instead of being passive sheep who can be pushed around.
This isn't a secret shadowy cabal; the developers' list is open to anyone who subscribes, the archives are publicly readable, and changes to the code are a matter of public record in our CVS repository.
'Power to the people' doesn't just _happen_ magically; the people have to make use of their power. First step: sign up for wikitech-l and speak up when you have an opinion!
This is all great theory. I subscribe to Wikitech, but a lot of material that goes through there goes right over my head. I know that there has been considerable discussion about using TeX for mathematical expressions, but I can't say that I understand that debate; however, since I have no plans to write about mathematical subjects, I can't concern myself too much with that. That's a characteristic of many tech debates: most people won't notice until the proposal is implemented.
I do support citizen activism, but I also undrstand that people have their own private lives, and that causes can soak up a tremendous amount of energy from private lives. Activists need to be careful about choosing their causes. I've certainly spoken up on many issues here, and I plan to continue doing so. Even so, there are many other comments on these lists where I have an opinion, but have to accept that there just isn't time to comment on everything. If it turns out that my value to Wikipedia is in contributing to actual articles, who benefits from my spending my time responding to endless e-mails. (The box was empty when I went to bed last night, but it had 64 messages when I looked in the morning.)
Perceived cabals don't usually develop because a minority is seeking to control a situation, but because a majority fails to participate until there is a crisis. When the crisis is reached the majority then find themselves totally without background to the problem, and getting on track is one big uphill fight. I can understan the frustration in Brion's comments, but I can also see it from the oother side.
Eclecticology
Rose,
wikitech-l is intended for discussions about feature additions, usability etc. Only when policy matters are concerned or when broad feedback is useful should wikipedia-l be used. Otherwise we'll never get anything done. Rest assured that TheCunctator will complain loudly on wikipedia-l if he thinks that our decisions are too far-reaching.
Regards,
Erik
Especily for things like that I have done a attempt to get support for Announce-l
http://www.wikipedia.org/pipermail/announce-l/2002-November/thread.html
Because nobody was interested it has not become anything. So do not complain now.
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org