[Foundation-l] Would you consider being on the Board?

[Gregory Maxwell]

On 6/13/06, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
> I find it strange that you excuse the Foundation for not doing it
> because "things take time", but this fact is insufficient to explain why
> the community, despite expending some efforts, has not finished doing it.

Fundamentally I can forgive the Foundation because it hasn't tried to
solve this problem.  Also, the things that the foundation would need
to do are fundamentally different from the work being done by the
'community': Raising money to hire people to do this work when the
'community' is objecting and claiming that they have it under control.

Exactly how is the community working to solve the problem of new
articles being created which are never reviewed by anyone involved
with the project?

Even things as simple as garbage being added to articles could be
improved right away. For example, Article gets moved to
Article/development. A copy is made back to article, a template added,
page protected. Sitewide JS hacks fix up edit links for most browsers.
Done. It's not perfect... but if successful mediawiki could be easily
enhanced to support the model. We've been arguing and blowing hot air
for at least a *year* on how to solve that problem, yet we've taken
nearly no action. No one has come up with a perfect system, or at
least if someone has no one has implemented it yet.  It's probably no
possible to come up with a solution the the community can agree is
good because our deadlock prevents us from building the experience
needed to build a good solution or even evaluate the qualities of a
proposal...   In some cases the community is simply terrible at
decision making, someone long winded noncontributing naysayer able to
come in and disrupt progress.

And I see that I am becoming long winded myself. My apologies, this is
my last post to the litst today.