Ryan Delaney <ryan.dela...@gmail.com> wrote: > Wikipedia has no "management style" because there are no managers. We should > not be a bureaucracy in any sense of the word. > That is the point of WP:BURO. It's not that "We are a bureaucracy, but if > you cut some corners we'll look the other way." That's not what it says at > all. It says "We are NOT a bureaucracy" and so "Knowing where to go" should > be much, MUCH less than half the "battle" of contributing to Wikipedia.
If you are right, that would mean that 1) Jimbo, 2) a Foundation that implements and prioritizes all new development, 3) a Board that does... something, 4) an Arbcom that tries hard (to tar and feather only the right people), 5) OFFICE, 5) and 6) a small army of <s>dorks</s> administrators (empowered, apparently to make un-reviewable 2-week blocks)... 'do not necessarily qualify as "managers."' On that basis its just simple logic that 'WP does not have' a '"management style"' and 'WP is not a "bureaucracy"'. But we see cases all the time, though, where an entity says it is not something that it is, or is something that its not - North Korea for example. And that's to say nothing of the fact that *any entity that has *some notion of 'getting things done' likewise has some notion of 'managing things,' and thus has some certain concepts of "management." Hence anything with 'some concept of management' will likewise have a "management style." This is true regardless of how how chic (geek variation) it is to just say something 'there is no management style (there is only wiki).' (Note: The geekword "wiki" does not suffice in describing the Wikipedia's actual purpose, scope, or processes, let alone its systems). So while WP may not have any "managers," nor does it implement a "management style," it still has elements that at least very very strongly resemble each, though perhaps badly. And of course even a taco stand with one employee can develop some kind of "bureaucracy" issues, so I don't see the point in continuing any pretense that suggests otherwise here. In fact, according to the traditional "canonical" terminology, Wikipedia doesn't even have "editors" - it only has "users." -Stevertigo _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l