[Foundation-l] transparency or translucency?

[Brian]

Although, on his user page he says that the mailing list is the place to
discuss the nature of Wikipedia. That seems a bit strange to me though - I
am quite sure that the volume of discussion about the nature of Wikipedia in
talk pages and meta pages vastly outweighs the discussions on the mailing
lists, and has a greater influence of people's behavior, and wiki-policy.

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Brian <Brian.Mingus at colorado.edu> wrote:

> I believe the point that Jimbo is making (i will certainly be corrected if
> wrong :-) is that there is no externally imposed hierarchy. The wiki really
> did start as a tabula rasa, and all discussions of its hierarchy can be
> found in its pages.
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 1:23 PM, James Rigg <jamesrigg1974 at googlemail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia-inc.com>
>> wrote:
>> > James Rigg wrote:
>> >> Thanks geni.
>> >>
>> >> So, to put it crudely, the talk of full transparency and lack of
>> >> hierarchy is now viewed as just naive idealism that existed at the
>> >> start of the project, and which has now been abandoned?
>> >
>> > No, not at all.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> But there isn't full transparency, and there is a hierarchy.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
>
>
> --
> You have successfully failed!
>



-- 
You have successfully failed!