2009/1/10 James Rigg <jamesrigg1...@googlemail.com>: > Thanks geni. > > So, to put it crudely, the talk of full transparency and lack of > hierarchy is now viewed as just naive idealism that existed at the > start of the project, and which has now been abandoned? >
I think it was all about Wikimedia wiki projects, which still remain almost 100% transparent and non-hierachical in a sense that everyone can edit and admins have rather organising and cleanig tools but they have no special power to decide the shape of content. But this is not necesarily about Wikimedia Foundation itself which is real life organization and has to cope with financial and legal issues. I think it is obvious that legal threats, most of financial decissions and most of technical issues has to be maintained by hired professional and maiking such decision by open discussions voting could lead to a disaster. However, indeed there is a tendency in Foundation to move many decission to "secret bodies" without any good reason. Among others, IMHO the big mistake was to move decisions of closing and opening projects (except it is forced by legal problems) to language committee, which was theoretically created as an advisory body only and making all process secret. -- Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/ http://www.ptchem.lodz.pl/en/TomaszGanicz.html _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
