Peter, I have an analogy and I was wondering if you might agree that it is a fair analogy to your situation at RFA (and in general at WP).
In the United State, the Lion's Club is a famous volunteer organization best known for collecting and recycling used eye glasses for the visually impaired. Now one could argue that the money they put to setting up collection facilities, recycling the glasses, etc, would be better spent on treatments to improve the visually impaired's eyes (such as Lasik, cornea transplants, etc). Also, there is a slight risk that some of the frames collected will have structural defects from use and could in an accident harm the person.
If someone who held these concerns showed up at a Lion's Club meeting announcing they thought the Club should stop collecting eyeglasses and would work towards that goal, people probably would be skeptical of them. If at every meeting they led off with a motion to shut down the eye-glass collection program people probably would get annoyed with them. And when they started showing up at collection drives with a poster saying "Don't give to the Lion's club, do something worthwhile with your money", it would take an incredible amount of tolerance for the club not to show the person the door.
Now an alternate approach might to be showing up at meetings and suggesting the Club do a better job reviewing donations to make sure they are safe. If it didn't work the first week, coming back the second week with details of how people are harmed by defective glasses. Or motioning that a fund raising drive for cornea transplants be held. Maybe down the road it could become the dominant part of the Club's activities and people would see the person who first suggested it as a leader.
And yes, I'm fully aware the Lion's Clubs are run by adults whose names are known publicly and who do bear liability for their actions. I'm talking more here about concepts than the nitty gritty details.
|