[Foundation-l] Re: Swedish, Spanish, French Wikinews set up

[Anthere]

Erik Moeller a écrit:
> Anthere-
> 
>> You can't claim that there is no objection when people are not even 
>> aware of something going on. You can't pretend the foundation list is 
>> a channel of information read by anyone. Nowhere is written that this 
>> is mandatory.
> 
> 
> The Foundation list is effectively our cross-project announcement list. 

Yes, but practically, that doesnot mean that people read it.
It certainly took you time to set that wiki. It also take you time to 
set this blogging chat where you will present yourself as the foundator 
of wikinews;
Was it so difficult to send a mail to the french mailing list or post on 
our main pump ?
I am sure it would have been appreciated.


> I also posted to the international Wikinews mailing list. 

You might be surprised, but I do not think editors read a list for which 
they do not have a project.
Telling the wikinews list is nice, but not informing french speaking 
people much. In short, not the right channel of communication.


I'm sick of
> people complaining that this or that hasn't been announced in this or 
> that place.

Yes ? Well, consider it an important information : if people complain 
about your bold actions regularly, there must be a reason.


  In any case, as I have already said, I don't think it
> matters at all if some French editors feel Wikinews is a bad idea. They 
> had their chance to vote. If there's anything *specific* to the French 
> community about Wikinews, that would be interesting to know. So far I 
> haven't heard it.

Pardon me ?

Who is gonna edit the french wikinews ? You ?

If you consider that the french-speaking community has no authority to 
decide if and when a french speaking project should be set, could you 
explain me for which reason a german powerless editor not able to write 
in French could have more authority upon this decision ?

I (and others) noticed with interest your chat planned with bloggers. 
Obviously, it will be very beneficial for you to announce that the great 
successful wikinews is already set in 6 or 7 languages. This will be an 
important announcement for you. A sign of your success.

Has it occured to you that similarly the french speaking community would 
have possibly planned to set a press release for the day it is started ? 
Perhaps a special page for this ? A big meeting ? Whatever ?

No, you probably essentially thought you had to increase the number of 
wikinews language for the meetup, quickly checked which languages could 
meet the 5 editors requirement, set up the wiki, and casually mentionned 
  on a couple of mailing lists and irc that it was done.

Sorry, but this is TOO easy.

I do not doubt you did it for good reasons and with good faith, and 
certainty to act in your right. However, I just question the opportunity 
of doing so, and the opportunity of doing so without asking us beforehand.



>> Given the opposition there was on the project, I think it would have 
>> been appreciated that you at least mention the creation over there.
> 
> 
> As I responded to Yann, I announced it in the #fr.wikipedia IRC channel, 
> and <phe> posted an announcement on the Pump after I did.

It was announced afterwards and took us by surprise.

Why did *you* decide to set it up ?
Since when is ONE user doing things rather than letting communities 
decide at their rythme when things should happen ?



>> Powerless user ?
> 
> 
> Yes. Any privileges I may have can be instantly revoked by the Board, of 
> which you are a member. All my actions were taken in accordance with 
> previous agreements with the Board and written procedures that have been 
> sitting there for months.

Yes, the problem is that you are hiding behind rules. And neglecting 
just people are more important than rules.

You know what ?

Aurevilly said something one day. He said

Et l'harmonie dans tout ça ?
y a un moment où ça me gonfle d'entendre parler de communauté libre et 
consensuelle pour écarter toute idée de règle. Alors qu'à la base une 
règle c'est fait pour l'harmonie, pas pour emmerder le monde ... 
w:fr:Utilisateur:Aurevilly.

Basically, it means "ultimately, a rule is here to allow harmony between 
people, not to create conflict".



>> When a criteria must mention that an editor must be able to edit a 
>> wiki for its vote to be valid, I think we are reaching a level of 
>> bureaucracy that goes too far.
> 
> 
> Not at all. This is a substantial requirement for something like 
> Wikinews, with lots of signatures to check for whether they have or have 
> not edited in that language - and if they haven't, it still doesn't give 
> you the secure knowledge that they can't. Instead of this rather complex 
> procedure, I have used a simple one, namely, 5 users with user pages 
> pledge to edit the project, and we assume good faith that their pledge 
> is serious. That doesn't mean I oppose the requirement, but it makes the 
> creation of new languages a substantially more time-consuming process 
> than it is now.

There is no hurry. If that takes more time, then let us take the time to 
do it.


>> You only made possible the existence of a local wiki with extremely 
>> little support and broken rules.
> 
> 
> Stop accusing me of breaking rules. Which rule did I break? Put up or 
> shut up.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Erik

Read better what I wrote. I spoke of "broken rules", not of "you 
breaking up" the rules.

This said, if you ask me, I think you are borderline of a sort of 
principle upon which Wikipedia relies. All Wikipedia is based on the 
fact the power comes from the people, not from one person. You may talk 
of all the rules you wish, when a group is submitted to the will of one 
person, there is a problem.