[Foundation-l] Global rights proposal

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
If I were to have some global kind of administrative reach, the last place
where any administrative action I would be likely to undertake would be on
the wikis with a lot of active bureaucrats or admins. I am more interested
in the small projects, the languages whose projects are marginal.

I do not want to be a steward with the notion of compulsory service. I want
to be able to do something when I come across a need. When I cannot, I will
not. When all the big projects opt out, it makes no difference to me. What
does make a difference is when there is endless talk without any result..
Actually endless talk does not make a difference, it only makes a difference
when there *is* a result.. Until this time, it is business as usual.
Thanks,
      GerardM

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Milos Rancic <millosh at gmail.com> wrote:

> There is the new issue to be discussed: How to vote about policy proposals?
> [1]
>
> According to the present discussion, there are two possible approaches
> for voting about global policies, with variants. It should be
> discussed separately, too: --~~~~
> * Person-based: --~~~~
> ** Every Wikimedian has right to vote (under some conditions, of
> course: total number of edits, recent number of edits and similar).
> --~~~~
> ** Only admins (bureaucrats, checkusers, oversights, stewards) has
> right to vote. --~~~~
> * Project based: --~~~~
> ** One project one vote. --~~~~
> ** Some way of positive discrimination of smaller projects, but not
> "one project one vote" principle. It was discussed earlier that it may
> be some kind logarithmic scale related to the number of very active
> contributors or similar. --~~~~
>
> [1] - http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Global_rights#How_to_vote.3F
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>