[Foundation-l] A PC instead of a VC

[Andrew Whitworth]

On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:17 AM,  <daniwo59 at aol.com> wrote:
>  GerardM's proposal states: "This council will be about the projects and  will
>  deal what makes the projects function better." As such: 1) would someone
>  angry with a project be able to give notice to this PC; and 2) is this PC, by
>  its very nature, somehow be construed as involved in the creation and
>  development of content?

I've been thinking about the council as a sort of gigantic,
cross-project "wikiproject" of sorts. A  wikiproject on wikipedia
takes self-responsibility in creating and managing content, responding
to complaints about that content, etc. I'm not a Wikipedian, so I
don't know all the details. However, I would like to know how
wikiproject "biographies of living persons" (or the closest analog, if
such a project does not exist by that name) handles the complaints and
notices that it must receive on a regular basis? I assume that if you
send a notice to a wikiproject or to the PVC, or even to OTRS, those
notices will be routed to an appropriate destination.

>  I am sure someone more legally minded can formulate even better questions.
>  Perhaps the answer is No, as you suggest. But it sure would suck to find out
>  that the speculation was wrong while in the middle of a court case.

This is true, and I agree that it would be good to hear from an expert
on the matter before doing anything. However, if we procede under a
different set of limiting assumptions, a lot of legal problems that
people have been having with this whole proposal seem to disappear
into thin air. Perhaps, for the sake of argument, we should all be
making some of these limiting assumptions right about now.

--Andrew Whitworth