2009/12/20 Tim Starling <[email protected]>: > Tomasz Ganicz wrote: >> 2009/12/20 Laura Hale <[email protected]>: >>> This was posted to the Strategy wiki but I don't think I ever mentioned it >>> on list. The case study itself can be found at >>> http://www.fanhistory.com/FHproposal.pdf . The blog entry about the case >>> study can be found at http://blog.fanhistory.com/?p=1103 . >>> >> >> I think the study shows the old problems, which mainly comes from >> Wikimedia/Wikipedia history. >> >> Meta wiki was first created as a place for meta-cross-project >> discussions including strategy planning as well. Then there was an >> assumption (IMHO false) that there is some sort of >> meta-cross-language-cross-projects-community which is allowed to make >> vital decisions by the system of consensus process mixed with voting >> system.It was soon found silly and many decisions were moved to >> Wikimedia committees that theoretically were created just as >> "advisory bodies" for Wikimedia Board of Trustees, but in fact the >> advice given by the committees was usually accepted by the Board. > > Note that Meta was founded in 2001, so it significantly predates the > Foundation and the non-Wikipedia projects. So the idea that > decision-making there was "soon found silly" is a bit of an > exaggeration. It predates the namespace feature in MediaWiki; it > originally had a role similar to the Help and Wikipedia namespaces on > the English Wikipedia today. >
Well, My "story" is quite obviously just a simplification of the long history. For me the first contact with meta was in 2002 and it was about some sort of strategy planning - the discussion of the "second stage of Wikipedia" - i.e. the idea of cleaning-up the Wikipedia as it become large enough to be called a real encyclopedia :-) (roughly 100 000 articles). The second contact was at 2003 when we were voting for "ambassador" of Polish Wikipedia. Anyway - what is my main point is that the consensus/voting system in meta - was based on an idea that there is a kind of meta-community, a large group of people interested to look at Wikimedia movement as a whole, which has their origins in various Wikimedia project's communities, not only English Wikipedia and not only Wikipedias. In fact, it was always 90%+ English Wikipedia community + 9%+ major other languages Wikipedia's communities members + less than 1% of minor languages Wikipedia's and other Wikimedia project's communities. Therefore that system never worked effectively - as there was never such a real meta-community which could effectively represent the general Wikimedia projects' editors community of communities. -- Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/ http://www.ptchem.lodz.pl/en/TomaszGanicz.html _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
