Sorry, where I said AbuseFilter I meant to say FlaggedRevisions. I'm not sure on how AbuseFilter came to be agreed on.
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 7:15 PM, Brian <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 6:59 PM, Jennifer Riggs <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> I'm curious. In your perspective who is doing the central management >> that makes it difficult for ideas to percolate up? WMF, Jimmy, Board, >> select administrators/highly involved community members? In your >> opinion, is there an infrastructure barrier or a personalities one? >> >> jriggs >> > > It's an infrastructure, policy and outreach issue. I assume that every > single person has the very best for the projects in mind and is doing it for > the right reasons. > > That said, I see the definition of community being interpreted very > narrowly. I liked what I saw with AbuseFilter but that was a singular case. > Filtering edits is almost on the same level as showing advertisements. In > these rare cases any change you try to make will quickly make its way > through the community because many people will be outraged. There are a lot > of other situations that don't propagate as well, not because they aren't > very important, but because people just don't know about them. > > I really like the ParserFunctions example. Enabled with hardly any > discussion and now used 500,000 times on the English Wikipedia. It had a > major effect on Wikipedia that made it much harder to use. And now we are > stuck in a programming mindset and we all assume that we all agreed to come > here. It just isn't the case. You won't be able to find where that agreement > happened. > > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
