[Foundation-l] The status of smaller languages on the Wikimedia Commons
Ray Saintonge
saintonge at telus.net
Thu May 11 09:51:38 UTC 2006
Birgitte SB wrote:
>--- Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Birgitte SB wrote:
>>
>>
>>Almost all rules should be open to change, because a
>>community thrives
>>on new ideas. Very few rules should be the subject
>>of persistent enforcement.
>>
>>
>I believe you misunderstand me here. I strongly
>believe that most policies should be up for
>reevaluation. Many things seem like great ideas, or
>seem as though they would naturally go hand in hand
>until you actually start *working* on them. Newcomers
>who active on a project are certainly welcome in my
>view. I see them as future established users. I
>think you have hit the nail on the head with "Good
>rules support existing practice rather than shape it."
> The problem with the original suggestion is such
>advertisement would atract people who have no
>understanding of existing practice. That is my
>concern. I feel anyone familar with existing practice
>will be aware of policy disscussion through the normal
>in-project channels.
>
Fair enough.
>I have not really experienced "unending debates about
>policy". Most proposals actually need little debate
>at all. Maybe that is a scale issue. I really am
>open to hear anyone interested in Wikisource to come
>add a voice to policy discussions. But I would expect
>them to keep an eye on the Scriptorium. Most
>everything that applies to Wikisource on a broader
>sense is disscused there. Maybe I am wrong, but
>imagine a large scale advertisment would attract
>people who are more interested that Wikisource does
>something they believe it should than *how* it does
>something. I am very much interested in the more
>pragmatic input which I believe requires some
>familarity with how Wikisource operates.
>
Maybe we're not as far apart as I suspected. All the more reason to sit
down for a chat in Boston. :-)
Ec
More information about the foundation-l
mailing list