On Tue, 9 Aug 2011 10:11:49 -0500, [email protected] wrote: >> And just to add to the argument, the projects are divided by language, >> and >> not by jurisdiction. Whereas in many cases it may be unimportant (for >> instance, we can safely assume that most of the activbities of the >> Swedish >> chapter are more related to Swedish-language projects, and if there is >> any >> chapter which "caters" to Swedisg-language projects it is the Swedish >> chapter), this is not correct for most of the major languages (English, >> French, German, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Russian ...) >> >> > > You are quite right about the limitations of chapters. However, I don't > see how these limiting factors are addressed by instead dealing with WMF > directly. I think this is an example of "perfect being the enemy of good > enough". > > BirgitteSB
Well, to give an example, I am perfectly fine with the recent WMF resolution on BLP and I am willing to comply. However, if such a resolution were issued by one of the chapters (for this matter it is irrelevant which chapter would do it) I would not feel myself in any way obliged to comply with such a resolution. No chapter has any jurisdiction over the Russian Wikipedia to which I used to contribute and over English Wikipedia to which I contribute now. Cheers Yaroslav _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
