And... unsurprisingly, Aaron has reverted the changes I referred to above.
Not with any explanation, of course, other than "not true." Looking at the
list of "reviewed" projects (where the review appears to constitute a small
handful of questions on the talkpage), the RCOM has reviewed a total of 10
projects in its history. I'm excluding the one where Aaron himself is a
co-investigator.
That might sound like a substantial amount, but in 2013 and 2014 the rate
so far is 1 (one) per *year*. Meanwhile, the AfD request languished for 7
months without a peep from Aaron or someone on RCOM. Since we're on the
subject, let's look at the research index and see what we can see.
# There is a "Gender Inequality Index" that has no comments from RCOM,
posted a month ago.
# We have "Modeling monthly active editors" submitted by Aaron himself.
This is worth looking at[1] as evidently an example of what an RCOM member
considers sufficient description of a research project. Specifically,
nothing at all.
# "Number of books read by WikiWriters" a page written by a high school
student that should have been deleted but hasn't been, suggesting the
submissions may not be closely monitored...
# "Use of Wikipedia by doctors" submitted both to RCOM and to IEG in March,
no comment by RCOM.
# Chinese Wikivoyage, created in January, no comment by RCOM.
# SSAJRP program - extensively documented, posted in October 2013, no
comment from RCOM and no RCOM liaison. This research is ongoing.
# Gender assymetry, posted in September 2013, no comment from RCOM.
# Dynamics of inclusion and exclusion, August 2013, no comment or
participation from RCOM.
I'm sure the list could go on, because the pattern is perfect - virtually
the only projects to get participation from either Dario or Aaron are those
managed by WMF staff members (and most often, Aaron himself is the
investigator). But the inactivity of RCOM is not news to the WMF. In
December of last year, Dario posted to rcom-l [2] that "The Research
Committee as a group with a fixed membership and a regular meeting schedule
has been inactive for a very long time." He then stated that "...the
existence of a fixed-membership group with a recognized authority on any
possible matter related to Wikimedia research and associated policies has
ceased to be a priority." Another member of RCOM, WMF employee Jonathan
Morgan, said in June on meta "I'm not sure what RCOM's mandate is these
days." When asked in March how many projects RCOM had actually approved, it
took Aaron four months to reply.[3]
So it is factually incorrect to suggest in documentation that RCOM approval
is required for anything; it's clear that RCOM as a body does not actually
exist. It may be argued that the approval of one of the two involved WMF
employees is required. If that's the case, then at least based on public
evidence they have been doing an absolutely woeful job of keeping up with
this labor. I'll admit it's possible that all of the communication has been
via e-mail, and in actuality Aaron and Dario have been very busy providing
feedback to non-WMF researchers. If that's the case, or of I'm missing some
other function that RCOM fulfills, I'd love to hear about it. Otherwise it
appears that RCOM is primarily an obstacle to prevent non-WMF researchers
from conducting research, a strange policy indeed.
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Modeling_monthly_active_editors
[2]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/rcom-l/2013-December/000600.html
[3]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Research_talk%3ASubject_recrui…