[Foundation-l] Where we are headed

[GerardM]

Hoi,
The fact that I am not in the Special Projects committee is in a way a
mixed blessing. It is a blessing in that it gives me more time to
nurture the WiktionaryZ project, develop related ideas and make
connections with people and organisations that share similar goals.

It is sad because it means that I have less opportunity to make the
WMF aware of what is happening with the WiktionaryZ project. I am
grateful for the core people in WiktionaryZ, they make it possible to
make it a true community project. We started with a commission and it
would be easy to extend this with many people who have proven to be as
worthwhile as its original members.

My interest in the Special Projects committee is that I am interested
in ensuring that the projects that are dear to my heart get the
attention and integration that they require. I am interested in all
the wikimedia projects, it is however obvious that my work is focused
on the projects that are most dear to my heart, I can appreciate why
people would not like to have me in the special projects committee
because they are different from what is considered the mainstream.

Then again, given that the Wikidata technology may have a great impact
on Wikipedia, beneficial in my honest opinion, and given that the
members of the Special Projects committee are pressed for time, it may
be clear why I wanted to be in there in the first place.

All in all, there are arguments why I am not in there. Given that
people are chosen by the existing committee members, it does not help
argueing publicly about why someone is or is not in a committee. The
one thing I am interested in is cooperation. You do not achieve it by
being resentful.

Thanks,
    GerardM


>
> GerardM, who has a more impressive track record in special projects
> than I do -- there would be no Kennisnet partnership and no
> WiktionaryZ project without him, applied for membership and was
> rejected. Frankly, this is not an example of an open organization that
> accepts the most qualified people to do the right thing. It's an
> example of "face by face" selection processes. No amount of rhetoric
> is going to change that.
>