Reading this I see that there may be a shift as to what the purpose of the
Wiki was for, from my understanding it was for the record keeping related to
WM-au activities, this would include some discussions and event notices but
I cant see any purpose that we would have a need for non-members to have
open access to our records that couldnt be managed by the creation of an
account for that purpose.

If an individual wants the rights of a member then $40 membership fee is a
very small barrier to gain such rights.



2009/6/14 John Vandenberg <jay...@gmail.com>

> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Sarah Ewart<sarahew...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yes, I also agree there's no consensus, but remember that this isn't the
> > English Wikipedia and we don't necessarily do things by consensus. WP:CON
> > can be useful in group decision making, but we're not bound by it and
> having
> > a Wikipedia-style "consensus" for something doesn't necessarily mean it
> will
> > or won't happen as the Chapter and the committee have obligations and
> > responsibilities outside a "consensus" among half-a-dozen people on a
> > mailing list.
> >
> > When we were setting up the official wiki, the committee considered using
> > flagged revs for members.  (see:
> >
> http://wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Resolution:Officialwiki_configuration_and_accounts
> )
> > I'm not sure what ended up happening with it or how far we got towards
> > implementation, but I guess we could consider the possibility of using
> > flagged revs.
>
> The original intention was that flagged revs was going to prevent
> members from making unapproved changes to pages which need committee
> approval before modification can go live.  So far we haven't needed
> that.
>
> Before non-members can edit the WM-AU website, a new resolution from
> the committee would be needed.
>
> > However, I feel that Brianna raised some important issues with regard to
> > members v non-members editing that can't just be cast aside.
>
> Brianna's suggestion is feasible, if a committee is willing to take on
> the extra work involved in managing the new account requests.  As
> there is no monetary disincentive, the process of accepting
> non-members would require verification of wiki-identity where
> applicable; there are plenty of people who would love to waste our
> time in order to have a few lulz.  And as these users will not be
> members, there will be no compensation for time and effort of whoever
> is handling new non-member account setup.
>
> We still have a meta presence, and non-members can knock themselves
> out over there.  As a result, I am opposed to opening the doors for
> the sake of a few spelling corrections.  Currently we don't need or
> want an active administration team.
>
> > Nick, I also don't think editing privs is an effective draw-card for
> getting
> > more members. I can't imagine anyone being motivated to join WMAu so they
> > can edit the official wiki. But we don't currently have the ability to
> offer
> > much in tangible members privs so it counts in "What do I get?".
>
> If someone indicated they were willing to pay $40 in order to edit our
> website, I would be quite worried about their motivations.
>
> --
> John Vandenberg
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
>



-- 
GN.
http://gnangarra.redbubble.com/
_______________________________________________
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l

Reply via email to