[Textbook-l] Power to dictate policy (Was: Game Guides)

Tue Jun 13 19:03:47 UTC 2006

Kernigh wrote:

>Cormac Lawler wrote:
>  
>
>>As far as I see it: the community has control over the content, and
>>the board bears the legal liability for the content. Jimbo's unique
>>part in this is that he retains the power to dictate policy where he
>>deems necessary, and when he thinks a project has veered off course
>>significantly from its goals or the goals of the foundation. I'm not
>>sure of what other times he has exercised this power, apart from the
>>recent debate about the content of Wikibooks - maybe someone else,
>>perhaps Jimbo himself, can clarify this.
>>    
>>
>
>Excuse me, can you clarify?
>
>How does [[User:Jimbo Wales]] "retain the power to dictate policy"?
>Retention requires that you already have the power. When did [[User:Jimbo
>Wales]] obtain the power to dictate policy "where he deems necessary"?
>
>I understand that someone in the Wikimedia Foundation can dictate policy in
>exceptional cases where that is required, but I do not understand how the
>Wikimedia Foundation is organised.
>
>-- [[User:Kernigh]]
>   http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/User:Kernigh
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Textbook-l mailing list
>Textbook-l at wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
>
>
>  
>
This is all history.   A done deal.

When Nupedia.com was in the process of flopping due to over regulation 
and over credentialization Wikipedia.com was set up.    Eventually a 
committment was made to the FDL which started attracting free culture 
types to assist the large number of P'hds who came over from Nupedia.com.

Some of us started trying to get involved in the business planning at 
meta to assure we could buy more servers and bandwidth when the load got 
too high on Jimbo's hobby budget.   It was at this time that I was 
designated a troll by Langer Sanger on his way out of the project.

Jimbo responded by always assuring the mailing that he had plenty of 
cash and surplus bandwidth for the Wikipedia experiment.    He shifted 
the active domain to wikipedia.org and in secret with perhaps some help 
from a select few employees or advisers unilaterally setup the nonprofit 
in Florida.

He announced on the maililng his intent to stack the Board and then he 
proceeded to do so.   It was a fait accompli or done deal and there was 
only limited whining and complaining on the wikipedia-l mailing list.

If you review the mailing lists since that time you will find occasional 
nuggets where policy has been handed down ever since by the god-king.  
There are also occasional pronouncements scattered through the various 
policy pages.

Since he controls the servers and bandwidth via the Wikimedia Foundation 
which he controls there is no appeal from a "Jimmy says" flash..

It was and is the contention of the remaining community locally that 
adequate protection for the community from the god-king is inherent in 
the ability to fork.   Most people dissatisfied with this state of 
affairs tend to move on, particularly after being labeled and lynched 
as  a "troll", "POV warrier", or other useful tag.

The way I see it, a fork is overdue.

Obviously a fork would have to address the issue of how the newly 
emerging community intended to govern/manage itself.   As God-Kings go 
Jimbo is not all that bad so there is little to be gained by exchanging 
him for another.

regards,
lazyquasar