On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Kurt Maxwell Weber <kmw(a)armory.com> wrote:
On Wednesday 25 June 2008 03:21, David Gerard wrote:
May I link yet again to "The Tyranny Of
Structurelessness", about how
hierarchies will form,
I don't know where this ridiculous straw man came from.
You said that Arb Com does not need to be disbanded, but need only be
ignored. I thought you were suggesting that this would be a
sufficient solution to the problem. If I'm wrong about your
suggestion, I apologize. But even so, this is not a straw man. It is
an additional statement.
I don't have a problem with hierarchies, in
general.
I do have a problem with hierarchies imposed externally by the fiat of one man
who's not all that special, upon what is claimed to be a "community"
project.
C'mon, Arb Com was imposed by the incorporator, president, and board
chair of the foundation which controlled the domain name and servers
on which the project ran (the servers were actually *owned* at the
time by a corporation of which I believe Jimbo was the majority
shareholder, and which he was definitely in control of). At the time
Arb Com was imposed, Jimbo had every right to install the arbitration
committee. To say he's "not all that special" is to be incredibly
ignorant of the historical context.
We've come a long way since then. Jimbo is no longer president, no
longer chair, and sits on a board with 7 others. The servers are
owned by the foundation, having been paid for by money raised from
public contributions. Jimbo's no longer "all that special". But the
Arb Com is a vestige from a day when he was. It has enough of a claim
to legitimacy that it should be disbanded explicitly, by a mechanism
which has an even greater claim to legitimacy, and not simply ignored.
By far the easiest mechanism which would have a claim to legitimacy
would be a new governance system which is at least approved by, if not
designed by, the current WMF board.