[Foundation-l] policy on languages without native speakers

[Jesse Martin (Pathoschild)]

Marcus Buck <me at marcusbuck.org> wrote:
> I think Mark thought of something like an official supervising institution, where at
> the end of the discussion this institution says "The subcommittee was right" or
>  "The subcommittee was not right". And that decision would be binding.

The language subcommittee operates with community input and board
oversight. I'd be very wary of adding more bureaucracy. What if you
disagree with this Language Subcommittee Oversight Committee? You said
their decisions are binding, so does nobody oversee the overseers? My
suggestion is that those people who would form the proposed oversight
committee simply join the language subcommittee to directly represent
their viewpoints.


Marcus Buck <me at marcusbuck.org> wrote:
> We are discussing, but if the subcommittee insists on its viewpoints, there is
> no way to do anything about this for people with other viewpoints.
> [...]
>  At the moment we are just argueing and argueing and Gerard saying "You
>  don't understand the world!" and this will last til the end of days if
>  nobody gets tired of it before ;-) (Gerard won't, I guess ;-) )

Gerard does not represent the language subcommittee (nor do I); the
subcommittee has not said a single word in this whole discussion.
Nobody in this discussion has a special veto or vote.

We are having a discussion between many members of the Wikimedia
community. Once this community discussion reaches a consensus, we can
submit the decision to the language subcommittee for their
discussion/amendments/approval (or to the Board directly for appeal).

-- 
Yours cordially,
Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)