+1 on them having their own crat and admins since they were approved, what possible harm could that have? they can always self-correct as the community gets bigger is the choices are not optimum.
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 8:13 AM, Philippe|Wiki <[email protected]>wrote: > While we can always learn from best practices, I firmly believe it's > best to leave local governance to local communities. > > If they want to have admins and crats, and have set up an election > system with appropriate controls and a system of checks and balances, > good for them. > > > __________________ > Philippe|Wiki > [email protected] > > [[en:User:Philippe]] > > > > > On Jan 27, 2009, at 9:38 AM, Huib Laurens wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > why should a wiki have a bureaucrat before it is created? > > > > A lot of small wikis doesn't have a crat and stewards will do the job. > > > > The same for admins, why not keep the test admins. I don't see why it > > is important to have admins before a wiki is created or has a > > comnunety. > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > -- > > Leave nothing but footprints, take nothing but pictures > > > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:SterkeBak > > > > _______________________________________________ > > foundation-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > -- Best Regards, Muhammad Alsebaey _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
