On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Sarah Ewart <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 2:01 AM, Gnangarra <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> 2009/12/11 Liam Wyatt <[email protected]> >> >>> One disadvantage of this would be that one of the promoted benefits of >>> membership (being able to edit the wiki) is no longer exclusive. >>> >> >> Seriously is this a benefit, >> whats the wiki for >> why would anyone join up just to edit the wiki >> > > No one will ever join the chapter to get editing rights. The connection of > editing rights granted to members and motivation for membership is a step > too far and illogical. I don't think anyone really believes that editing > rights is a motivation for joining, but it is a right granted to members. > Most, possibly all, people join the chapter because they want to support it > and that's it. > > However, I don't support opening editing for the reasons that were raised > by several people when this was last discussed a few months ago. We have in > the past granted editing rights to people for special reasons (as Andrew > referred to, we gave GLAM partners access for organising and working on > GLAM) but in general I support editing remaining as a membership right. > If no one will join in order to get the right to edit then its value as a right is relatively small. Maybe in the future it will indeed be a valuable right (like some professional associations have log-in websites too) but for the moment having it closed seem to be benefiting neither the members or the non-(potential)-members. The giving of the special access to people has happened, IIRC with two accounts. Both were War Memorial staff who were helping with the preparation of GLAM-WIKI and not as a thankyou or benefit of having been a partner in the event. On the other hand, the reason why the GLAM-WIKI recommendations<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM-WIKI_Recommendations>live at meta rather than at the chapter wiki (where they, ideally, should have resided) was to allow people to comment on them. > > >> >> though that Wikimedia is built on a philopsy of anyone can edit, surely >> promoting that philopsy is the aim of the chapter. Wouldnt it be wise for >> Wikimedia-Australia to hold that as corner stone of its purpose. Does anyone >> think that the goals and ideals "which we hold dear" should not be what we >> present in our public place. >> > > I think this is flawed logic too. The Wikimedia Foundation's own website is > invitation only, as is the internal wiki, the Chapter's wiki, the OTRS wiki, > the ArbCom wiki, etc. All for different reasons, but the idea that we should > open editing to anyone because Wikipedia is built on a philosphy of open > editing is a wonky rationale IMO. We aren't Wikipedia and we're not > obligated to run the chapter in the same way Wikipedia runs. The main reason > I don't support opening editing up is that we lack an online community to > deal with the problematic edits and vandalism etc that we'll inevitably have > to deal with. It's the public face of the chapter and the pages need to be > maintained accurately, the membership pages, minutes and resolutions need to > have integrity. > > The UK chapters' website restricts editability to the various pages that are of importance e.g. meeting minutes<http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meetings>, donation <http://donate.wikimedia.org.uk/>, constitution<http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Constitution>... but because it allows editing by default anyone can contribute to "volunteer<http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Volunteer>" and "water cooler <http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Water_cooler>". The integrity of the things that need to remain stable is maintained, but it still allows for people to engage. On the other hand, neither the French<http://www.wikimedia.fr/>and German <http://www.wikimedia.de/> chapter websites are wikis - they're "normal" read-only websites. I think both of these latter chapters are something that the Australia can aspire to in terms of capacity, activities, members and pretty-website-ness, but the UK chapter is probably a fairer comparison because our chapters are effectively the same age and have the same budgets (up till now). > > >> The chapter Wiki as a way of facilitating discussion within the Australian >> community is a good starting point, let it be a host for members to write >> about their wiki experiences, to seek help in opening doors to the GLAM >> sector, let it be somewhere for non wiki people to seek assistance in >> opening their doors and making what they have collected freely available to >> all. >> > > I also disagree with this. The chapter's wiki is a special purpose wiki, > its official website and public face, it's not a free all-purpose hosting > venue. > I don't think that being a place where people who are interested in Australian Wikimedia activities can discuss things is considered "all-purpose hosting". Sure, if people start spamming etc. we would have to respond somehow (I would suggest requiring login - no IP editing) but if people start talking *too much* on the chapter wiki then I think that's probably a good problem to have. Certainly it's a better problem than having *not enough* activity. -Liam > > >> By all means place restrictions on what non-members can do but remember >> Wikimedia-au is judged by what its does and dont expect others to do what >> Wikimedia-au isnt willing to do itself. >> >> Wikimedia-au long term future rests on whether it can grow its membership >> over the next year, to do that its needs to be "of value" it needs to be >> doing things to create that value, importantly it needs to be seen to be >> doing them. People arent going to be productive in the group if there is >> nothing for them to productive with, they arent going continue with a group >> if they dont have a voice in that group, and they definitely wont join a >> group if they cant first experience the group and meet some of the people >> already there. >> >> >> Gnangarra >> http://gnangarra.redbubble.com/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimediaau-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimediaau-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l > >
_______________________________________________ Wikimediaau-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
