--- On Thu, 3/12/09, Ray Saintonge <sainto...@telus.net> wrote:
> From: Ray Saintonge <sainto...@telus.net>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Pissed off at en:Wikisource
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Date: Thursday, March 12, 2009, 3:03 AM
> Birgitte SB wrote:
> > Sorry but there is no reason to have a RFC on Meta for
> anything remotely like this situation. And I would say
> that if were regarding any wiki (I am sure I have said that
> for similar situations on other wikis in the past).
> The wikis are autonomous on these issues. If someone
> has reason why en.WS adminship rules are incompatible with
> the general purposes of the project, then please
> share. Otherwise discuss in the proper forum which is
> en.WS.
> >
> >
> I have since the very beginning been a strong supporter of
> project
> autonomy, and have usually been very critical of anyone who
> tries to
> impose the rules of other projects in Wikisource.
> Last summer, when
> another de-sysop process happened, I also spoke strongly
> against
> allowing ourselves to be overly influenced by that person's
> overly bad
> behaviour on other projects; I conservatively concurred
> with what
> happened based solely on events at wikisource.
>
> In the course of the discussion about me, I considered
> coming here at an
> early stage, but decided that I would let things play out
> on wiki
> first. I did not raise the issue here until a few
> days after the
> decision was closed and implemented.
>
> If I had not commented on events here, would you have
> noticed it, and
> would it even have crossed your mind to comment as you did
> above?
I don't follow exactly what you mean. I often comment here that some new
thread is an internal issue and not a Foundation one. If you had commented
on-wiki, I would have responded there. If you hadn't commented about the
situation at all, I wouldn't have commented either.
Given
> the still relatively small community at en:ws, where does
> one turn for a
> calmer and more objective analysis from someone who is not
> a part of the
> apparent piling on?
You can approach community members who were not part of the apparent piling on
and ask them for such an analysis. You can ask someone who is not part of the
community and that you respect for generally giving calm and objective analysis
to share their opinion on en.WS. I am not against people from out of the
community helping out with this. I just don't believe either such a wide
announcement nor having the opinions being placed outside of en.WS should be
encouraged.
If the result of raising the
> issue here is a fairer
> discussion on wiki, I can't complain about that.
> There should always be
> a place for off-wiki safety valves.
>
> I see that you have asked a question on my talk page, so I
> will address
> more specific matters there shortly.
>
> Ec
Thank you for bringing the specifics back on-wiki..
Birgitte SB
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
