[Wikipedia-l] Re: mail WikiSpecies

[Andrew Lih]

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 16:59:32 +0200, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> Actually, a new project has legal, monetary and logistical issues attached.

This argument could be made for nearly anything under the Wikimedia
umbrella, so it would be best to define explicit scope and procedures.

> This project was initiated by a non wikipedian and rejoined by
> wikipedians as far as I understood.
> Wiki space... I think little discussion occured on wikispace
> It was mostly on this mailing list, on meta and on irc.

This has been a continuing problem with Wikipedia/media projects.
Multiple communications channels are great for grassroots
collaboration for content, but it's not good for due process. As Mav
mentioned, I did not find it mentioned on Meta Goings on and Wikimedia
News at all. If it was there, I think there would be much less problem
with the decision. We should be able to improve on this.

> > Clearly, the way you suggest (by the board, but closed) is very much
> > against the open spirit the Wikipedia community is used to. To be
> > clear, I'm largely in favor of the Wikispecies proposal, and don't
> > think the board acted in bad faith. But we should also take this
> > opportunity to make sure that we set the right precedent for future
> > decisions.
> 
> I see not why you say that "I" suggest "by the board but closed".
> I certainly did not suggest that.
> As I already said, I was not the one who started the decision making
> discussion. Also, it is not because I take the time to answer people
> concerns that I am the one responsible of the current situation.

No no, I didn't mean that you were the originator of the idea, only
that it's the one you mentioned. Sorry about the misunderstanding. I
certainly don't think you favor a "closed" board, but the problem is
of perception.

> We will try to do better in the future, to listen more and longer. But I
> must warn you of one point. Jimbo, Angela and I are all three already
> streching our time limits. If you all want us to listen better, you will
> have to help us by providing better insight, summaries and such... and
> mostly, do not expect us to start polls or votes all the time. Neither
> of us three are very happy with votes and I doubt we'll start organising
> votes one by one. In short, those who want to help us take some final
> decisions will have to wet their shirt, hang around and call people to
> participate to discussion, create summaries, emulate discussions and co.

Yes, there is the alternative of delegating it to folks in the Meta
community to organize the effort and the voting. Most boards of
organizations don't get involved down the level of making these types
of decision. Your time is valuable, delegate!  And  I do realize this
is the opposite of "Be bold." :)

-- 
Andrew (User:Fuzheado)