[Foundation-l] Global rights proposal

Wed Jun 25 12:22:26 UTC 2008

This is wrong. It looks nastily to me like another example of en getting a desperately raw deal, and a backdoor attempt to railroad through a bad idea, not accepted by the community, the need for which has not been proven anyway. The phrase "the community" has also been understood to mean that, if you are a member of a the community, your vote's as good as anyone else's. Wikimedians should not be penalised for the sin of not belonging to a minority.

CM
> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 12:55:24 +0200> From: millosh at gmail.com> To: foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Global rights proposal> > There is the new issue to be discussed: How to vote about policy proposals? [1]> > According to the present discussion, there are two possible approaches> for voting about global policies, with variants. It should be> discussed separately, too: --~~~~> * Person-based: --~~~~> ** Every Wikimedian has right to vote (under some conditions, of> course: total number of edits, recent number of edits and similar).> --~~~~> ** Only admins (bureaucrats, checkusers, oversights, stewards) has> right to vote. --~~~~> * Project based: --~~~~> ** One project one vote. --~~~~> ** Some way of positive discrimination of smaller projects, but not> "one project one vote" principle. It was discussed earlier that it may> be some kind logarithmic scale related to the number of very active> contributors or similar. --~~~~> > [1] - http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Global_rights#How_to_vote.3F> > _______________________________________________> foundation-l mailing list> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_________________________________________________________________

http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/msnnkmgl0010000002ukm/direct/01/