[Foundation-l] Introduction to the internal workings of the language subcommittee

Mark Williamson node.ue at gmail.com
Mon Apr 14 09:45:57 UTC 2008

>  Subcommittees exist precisely to work productively where larger
>  processes are inefficient or arbitrary. Thus, the language
>  subcommittee will continue to develop and enforce the language
>  proposal policy at
>  <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Language_proposal_policy> even if
>  the larger community cannot achieve any consensus on particular
>  details.

I think the question was more along the lines of, what if the larger
community seems to have reached an agreement that is at odds with the
consensus within the langcom? Obviously, as policy is written, the
language committee has the final say, but that just doesn't seem
right. The language committee may have experts on it (I do not know),
but it is not a committee of language experts any more than is the
wider community.

>  But we are indeed responsible to the "community of contributors".
>  We're members of that community, and our charter is approved by the
>  Board of Trustees; we can be dissolved or reorganized or pushed around
>  by the board. Several members, including myself, also frequently
>  follow or even initiate discussions on Foundation-l to get wider
>  community input.

Well, I think there is a perception around here, although it may be
false, that Gerard is completely unwilling to listen to or care about
the opinions or ideas of the plebes. You, on the other hand, always
seem receptive, even if you do not agree with ideas, and do not seem
as argumentative (I'm not saying I'm not argumentative, because I
think I am, but Gerard is certainly argumentative as well, and I think
many here would agree).

>  Regarding diversity of opinions in the subcommittee, a little less
>  would be nice so we can argue less. ;)

Diversity of opinions may make consensus more difficult, but it is
necessary to have a truly well-functioning committee in any area. If
all senators in the United States agreed about everything all the
time, then they would not be reflective of the will of the people (not
that they are anyhow, but I think they reflect the will of the people
much better than they would if they all held the same opinions). There
are many different opinions within the Foundation, and so there should
be on the LC as well.


More information about the foundation-l mailing list