That is where the service project and the independent
project clash. Were
it merely service, the commons would abide the wish of the wikipedians
(wikisourcians etc), were it independent, the Wikipedians would have bad
luck and live with it.
Nah, the world is not always just black or white.
Commons provides "a" service. We have a clear mission statement which maybe
needs to be communicated to the other projects more clearly. The service we
are providing is hosting and administration of freely licensed media. We are
not a second imageshack/flickr whatever.
Furthermore we would have a hard time operating commons if commonists were
treated as a bunch of slaves who merely had to do what the other projects told
them to do. Please do not forget that commonists do not only administer
content, they also "create" content. With this respect commons is an
independent project on its own.
In my view there are two sides to the commons medal. And we should not try to
cast commons into either role exclusively.
--
[[en:User:Dschwen]]
[[de:Benutzer:Dschwen]]
[[commons:User:Dschwen]]