[Foundation-l] Global rights proposal

[John Vandenberg]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 10:22 PM, Christiano Moreschi
<moreschiwikiman at hotmail.co.uk> top-posted and garbled the quoted
passage:
>> 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
>>
> This is wrong. ....

Which aspect of this list of options is "wrong" ?

> It looks nastily to me like another example of en getting a desperately raw deal,
> and a backdoor attempt to railroad through a bad idea, not accepted by the
> community, the need for which has not been proven anyway. The phrase
> "the community" has also been understood to mean that, if you are a member
> of a the community, your vote's as good as anyone else's.

Are you referring to global rights in general ?  en.WP will likely be
completely unaffected, as they will likely want to be excluded from
global rights by either policy or practise.  Nobody would complain, as
globals rights is primarily not about en.WP.

If you are referring to a "project based voting system" being a means
of railroading, I cant see how it could be any worse than the recent
railroading that occurred by English Wikipedians when "one person one
vote" was used.

> Wikimedians should not be penalised for the sin of not belonging to a minority.

Oh, but English-only speaking Wikipedians who haven't participated in
other projects are in a minority; by their own choice!

If you only know English, there are other smaller English projects
besides Wikipedia that you could join, or you could quite easily
participate in Wikisource transcription projects in other languages -
all you need is have vision and a little familiarity with typography.
For example, the French project would love assistance on these
projects:

http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Livre:La_Fontaine_1_Fables.djvu
http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Livre:Le_Koran_%28traduction_de_Kazimirski%29.djvu

--
John Mark Vandenberg