Hi,
2014-02-26 22:56 GMT+05:30 Fæ faewik@gmail.com:
On 26 February 2014 17:07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 26 February 2014 16:46, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
If anyone wants to create meaningful and lasting change to Commons, then please create a Request for Comment on Commons[1] rather than making a fuss and criticising Commons (volunteer) administrators in non-Commons discussion channels, which most Commons volunteers are unlikely to either notice or care much about.
The trouble with your proposed course of action is that it seems the action *least* likely to resolve the problem.
Commons is at a stage where the problems with its approach can only be worked around.
No David. It is just the least dramatic approach. As for the mantra "OMG Commons is broken", you wore out that record a long time ago.
Those using channels elsewhere to create noise and heat, can hardly be considered to be using their time to help us reach a community consensus if deliberately avoiding the community they are targeting.
Folks, dust off your Wikimedia Commons accounts, and log in. You can start by raising your issues at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:VP rather than by sending emails or writing in other places where Commons volunteers are never going to read your opinion.
On this, I agree (at least partially) with David. If only some Commons admins were not pursuing a political campaign to delete URAA-affected files under false pretences, everything would be much better.
I am not saying (yet) that Commons cannot be fixed, but there is certainly wrong there.
I am thankful to the board who, in its last statement, has taken a position allowing the community to find a solution to these files. However some admins continue to ignore that, and to oppose any kind of proposition. This needs to change. If these admins didn't take that position, no chapter would have felt the need to send such letters.
Regards,
Yann