I see the talk page on Meta for this committee hasn't been updated since
2013. I copied James' update to the talk page. I am going to oppose there
and ask anyone else interested in reverting this decision to comment on
meta[1]. This needs consensus, but more so, a choice, that was never given
to the larger community.

This committee can be dissolved if needed, or another one can be set up in
its place.

On Mon, Oct 5, 2015, Pavel Richter <m...@pavelrichter.de> wrote:
> ​Theo, you argue process, I argue outcome.
> They faced a problem, they tackled it, they made a decission. And their
> mandate? They *showed up and volunteered*. That is enough mandate in my
> book.

This is a ludicrous proposition to even defend. The outcome, as you might
have noticed isn't being supported or endorsed by the majority. This is not
a solution, it is another problem, worse than that it is going against the
grain by taking an open process and making it closed. By your logic, I can
claim this new solution is a bigger problem, some of us here are objecting
to it and we can tackle it by dissolving the committee? Or how about I
apply the same logic to everyone donating to WMDE - recognize a problem,
tackle it, communicate with the concerned parties and not even tell you
about it, because I "showed up and volunteered". The whole logic here is
indeed, non sense as MF-W put it.

First, there is no consensus the current process is a problem. Second, if
there is, James is and has been chiefly responsible for the entire process,
ergo, the problem. Now, the new initiative is to give James complete
control to decide things in private without discussion, deliberation or so
much as a notification to the wider community.

> The revolution will not be community-approved.

Actually a revolution by definition, would have to be majority/community
led and hence, community-approved. What we have now is a small group of
connected individuals in a clique, who make large decisions for everyone.
That would be an Oligarchy, and I for one, am tired of seeing the same
people make these horrendous decisions.

On Mon, Oct 5, 2015, Pavel Richter <m...@pavelrichter.de> wrote:
> Hopefully not by consensus, but by a small group of people who just say:
> Enough is enough).​

You clarified my point further.


[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimania_Committee#Oppose
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Reply via email to