[Foundation-l] Pending Changes development update: September 27

Tue Sep 28 22:10:20 UTC 2010

Without having formed in opinion either way to what has come out of the trial or the straw polls, I don't understand why there is such importance placed on *technically* disabling the feature.  If en.WP doesn't want to use it, why don't they not just move all the articles back to semi-protection?  Empty out the pending changes from the on-wiki interface. This would likely have to be done *before* disabling it anyways. Just because the extension is installed doesn't mean it has to be used. I can see no reason why Erik or Danese should be being asked to determine consensus. 

I get that this is an important political issue for various people.  I don't get why the devs are being focused on.  Please let the devs out of the argument. I can't imagine why any of them would want to touch that button with a ten-foot pole until you have clearly decided.  Especially as it isn't really necessary for them to be involved in achieving a negative result.

Birgitte SB

--- On Tue, 9/28/10, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:

> From: Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Pending Changes development update: September 27
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 4:42 PM
> 2010/9/28 Risker <risker.wp at gmail.com>:
> > Ummm, no, Erik. The objective was to have consensus to
> KEEP it on, not
> > consensus to turn it off, and that was always the
> agreement. There was
> > never, until the lack of consensus to keep it on
> became clear, a direct
> > suggestion that we'd be stuck with it.
> 
> Anne, there are no obvious answers here. Two thirds of the
> community
> told us "Please keep this feature enabled", some of whom
> said "we
> should expand this to all (BLP|high-risk
> articles|whatever)". Jimmy
> posted interpreting this as direction-setting for continued
> testing
> and development, and asking us to provide a development
> timetable,
> which we did. Had we then said "Oh, sorry, no consensus for
> anything,
> we'll just turn it all off for now", we'd have a different
> set of
> people heaping blame on WMF right now. At the end of the
> day it's just
> a feature that we're continuing to improve, and it's up to
> the enwiki
> community to figure out how/why/where it wants to use it.
> We have no
> stake in this, other than wanting to support the project as
> best we
> can.
> -- 
> Erik Möller
> Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
> 
> Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
> 
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> 