[Foundation-l] could we please have a community-l?

[Jussi-Ville Heiskanen]

On 8/11/07, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/08/07, Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
> > If you were going to ask those questions on a wiki, it would be
> > meta.wikimedia.org, so perhaps the right mailing list for that is also
> > the meta mailing list rather than community-l? There's a
> > not-yet-official list for Meta at
> > <http://mail.lists.wikipedia.be/mailman/listinfo/meta-l_lists.wikipedia.be>.
> > It hasn't been widely promoted and only has 29 subscribers so far.
> >
> > There's a request for Wikimedia to host that list at
> > <http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10098>.
>
> Well that's fine. The name is not of great importance to me. I just
> want some infrastructure to exist.
>

Hi. I've been mulling over your suggestion, and not only do I
find it a capital idea, but actually I would humbly suggest that
the name *does* matter.

If the name was community-l, it might attract the kind of
"silent knowledge", tradition not policy, discussion.

That is to say not "thou shalt not" type
Mosaic law type process/policy wonking discussion,
but (and I know people do feel "clue" can not be
legislated) the kind of discussion that might impart
through gentle instruction the best practises of the
community as a whole and accross projects.

It could also serve as a timebinding tool, enmeshing the
varying generations of wikimedians together more
fully in a more perfect union. I have long been thinking
it would be a useful thing if the newer wikipedians
had at the very least an understanding of the more
seasoned veteran wikipedians mindset, and a better
historical perspective. More and more clashes onwiki
appear to stem from the disparity of culture between
those who have been with us for long, and those who
are doing the work enthusiastically with the exuberance
of just discovering wikimedia.

--
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]