[Commons-l] Principles of organisation - who do we serve?

Tue Nov 14 10:48:14 UTC 2006

David Gerard wrote:
> On 14/11/06, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> (...and perhaps we can make the pertinent point, without whining too
>> much, which led some people to consider this option: overwhelming
>> copyvios and underwhelming supply of labour.)
> 
> 
> I recall that when en:wp was having problems with vandalism of the
> Main Page featured article image, Commons admins were remarkably
> difficult to find. So some asked "could we have an admin on en: made
> an admin on Commons for this reason?" and got back "well, why don't
> you make all Commons admins admins on en: first."
> 

We've had an administrator's noticeboard for a while now; all you need
to do is ask. I don't know who made that other comment.

> Some people in the Commons community seem to want it both ways. Is
> Commons an entirely independent project or does it, as a service
> project, need to open itself up to administration by people from other
> projects to keep up with its actual original purpose?
> 

Ahh, but people from other projects want it both ways too: you want our
images but jump up and down when we delete them. Yes, we need people
from other projects, mainly for language diversity.

> This discussion appears to demonstrate Commons simply isn't making
> admins through its own processes anywhere near fast enough and its
> processes need radical revision.
> 

We've currently got ONE applicant.

-- 
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 569 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/attachments/20061114/abce53ea/attachment.pgp 