Advisory Council on Project Development Options

[Eva Destruction]

Surprised this hasn't already been mentioned here, especially since it seems to be composed of 75% WR members. While I'm more than willing to be pleasantly surprised, this looks like a very peculiar idea to me. (My thoughts on the matter are here).

[Nerd]

Heh. Let's hope they all quit.

I did not see this coming.

Protest resignation? Kirill was one of the few sensible people left on the committee.

You have got to be kidding me.

This post has been edited by Nerd: Sat 11th July 2009, 10:39pm

[everyking]

Heh. Let's hope they all quit.

I did not see this coming.

Protest resignation? Kirill was one of the few sensible people left on the committee.

You have got to be kidding me.

Glad to see them go. How about the remaining arbitrators acknowledge the overwhelming community opposition to this council and instead speak in favor of the community adoption of a proposal that would lead to the election of a serious reforms committee?

[Kelly Martin]

How about the remaining arbitrators acknowledge the overwhelming community opposition to this council and instead speak in favor of the community adoption of a proposal that would lead to the election of a serious reforms committee?

The Wikipedia community will never elect a "serious reforms committee" because the Wikipedia community does not want reform. How many times do we have to tell you this before before you grasp it?


Looking back at the events so far, I'd say that the main mistake the ArbCom made was in announcing the Advisory Council. They should simply have established the council without announcing it, then let it do its work. Announcing it merely invited the community to throw spears at it.

[everyking]

How about the remaining arbitrators acknowledge the overwhelming community opposition to this council and instead speak in favor of the community adoption of a proposal that would lead to the election of a serious reforms committee?

The Wikipedia community will never elect a "serious reforms committee" because the Wikipedia community does not want reform. How many times do we have to tell you this before before you grasp it?


Looking back at the events so far, I'd say that the main mistake the ArbCom made was in announcing the Advisory Council. They should simply have established the council without announcing it, then let it do its work. Announcing it merely invited the community to throw spears at it.

On the contrary, I think the idea of reforming Wikipedia governance is broadly popular, and I think that comes through in this RfC. People either think Wikipedia needs genuine reform, and the council is contrary to that purpose, or they think the council represents an actual step towards reform...very few people seem to think Wikipedia needs no reform.

[Somey]

...People either think Wikipedia needs genuine reform, and the council is contrary to that purpose, or they think the council represents an actual step towards reform...very few people seem to think Wikipedia needs no reform.

Again, for many of these people, the word "reform" actually means "ban more nasty trolls" and "stop questioning me."