On 08/03/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote:
On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 11:16:21 -0500, Delirium
<delirium(a)hackish.org>
wrote:
It's kind of vague, really. Historically, the
Arbitration Committee
took over the roles Jimmy previously exercised. Informally, he
currently heads it (from afar, mostly), and has authority to veto its
decisions, appoint/remove members, etc. Even more informally, he does
so in accordance with community approval (elections, the policy
ratification vote, etc.). At one point Jimmy was also formally in
charge, but now in hierarchical terms the Foundation's Board of
Directors would be, with Jimmy retaining informal/customary authority
over some English-Wikipedia-specific processes. Now that authority over
the community is mostly effective because the community tacticly
approves of it, so teasing out which has priority is tricky.
Unless you are English, where the concept of a constitutional monarchy
is something we've always lived with :o) Yesterday I was riding along
the Queen's highway. Literally - The Mall.
Ways to get amusing reactions out of American tourists blocking the
road and not moving out of the way: start snarling about Obstructing
the Queen's Highway in the most strident tone you can muster.
Authority here derives from the monarch, but is vested
in others, and
any attempt to exercise power against the will of the people would
cause problems. It took us a couple of hundred years to get the
balance right, and it's still changing. But over that entire period,
the country remained governable and tolerably well-regulated. Is that
so bad?
I have in the past mused over the idea that the evolution of power in
Wikipedia bears a shocking resemblance to the evolution of power in a
British-style constitutional monarchy; a clear trend of slowly
devolving power and authority to others; those others selected in a
growingly democratic manner; and a heavy reliance on running matters
by The Way Things Are Done Around Here By Sensible Decent Chaps.
I'm not sure what period I'm willing to stretch the analogy as far as,
though ;-)
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk