On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 3:05 AM, David Goodman <[email protected]> wrote:
> We need, as does every voluntary society, the involvement of many > ordinary members in each aspect of the government of the society. We > need, thus, the influence of community opinion--expressed opinion, > expressed without fear of rejection for not following the established > forms. > > To the extent that we have special cadres, they will be > self-perpetuating and excluding. To maintain coherence, we need a > limitation in the numbers of people able to take the final action--as > admins or arbs do--but not in the numbers of people who participate in > making the decision. I'm sorry, but if that's where you agree with me, you _have_ misunderstood me. I stand for exactly the opposite. I think it is a terrible waste of energy to get the community involved in each and every blocking decision. To form a good opinion about a block will often cost considerable time (an hour or so) of reading in on the conflict. Because of that I don _not_ want each and every person doing that on each and every block. Instead, we appoint a few people that we trust to do this reading and decision-making in our place - read: the arbcom. -- André Engels, [email protected] _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
