On Sep 1, 2014 3:21 PM, "Philippe Beaudette" <pbeaude...@wikimedia.org>
> > On Sep 1, 2014, at 8:45 AM, Todd Allen <toddmal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > That's contradicted by, among other things, ACTRIAL as mentioned above.
> > en.wp community came to a clear consensus for a major change, and the
> > shrugged and said "Nah, rather not."
> That's... Not exactly what I remember happening there. What I remember
was that a pretty good number (~500) of enwiki community members came
together and agreed on a problem, and one plan for how to  fix it and asked
the WMF to implement it. The WMF evaluated it, and saw a threat to a basic
project value. WMF then asked "what's the problem you're actually trying to
solve?", and proposed and built a set of tools to directly address that
problem without compromising the core value of openness. And it seems to
have worked out pretty well because I haven't heard a ton of complaints
about that problem since.

I don't agree with that assessment, but it's possible I'm missing some
elements of the process. Philippe, any chance you could full in the summary
with a few specifics, and maybe some links?

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Reply via email to