Looney Labs Rabbits Mailing list Archive

RE: [Rabbits] Straw Poll: Wiki Attendance Frequency

  • FromDavid Artman <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • DateMon, 27 Aug 2007 12:58:04 -0700
Glad to hear from everyone; though sad to see it's mainly "nope, don't
care"--I didn't expect that!

Regarding this point:
> From: "Christopher Hickman" <tophu@xxxxxxx>
> ... The thing is with a wiki is just do it.  If the community
> consensus is that it should be done a different way, then someone in said
> community will do it.

See, I don't think that's a strong way to manage our wiki at all. We're
not wikipedia; we're a close community of friends and fans of the
Looneys. Further, "someone in said community will do it [differently]"
is nothing like a "consensus": rather, it's GUI-of-the-week management,
where anyone and everyone might restructure the site navigation, main
page, or scheduling techniques (or naming conventions or organizing
principles or templates, etc, etc...).

So, considering how much effort I intend to invest in the initial
paradigms, templates, organization, navigation, and instruction, I am
disinclined to do it all if the general policy is "eh, someone will redo
it if they don't like it." Sorry, but I don't have that kind of time to
hemorrhage, to create things that can be destroyed on a whim.

Furthermore, I have already run into "get everyone's agreement"
requests, when I have merely *proposed* something, not even made the
change permanent. And so I leave the proposal as a proposal, maybe
mention it here... and wait a month for anyone to counter or ratify it.

The problem I (for one) am facing is that I am  waiting for feedback
that, apparently, will never happen: people are not ratifying any
proposals nor are they offering alternative ideas (I see now why: almost
no one goes there and checks Recent Changes for new discussions). It's
just me and the crickets, as I spin out paragraph after paragraph on
planning Talk pages....

So anyhow, "just do it" is not a good answer, for me, given the nature
and closeness of our community and given the fact that I will not "just
do" something that could be undone on a whim. But I'll happily make
significant structure and improvements if I know they are going to be
"protected" by the community, via good habits, consistency, and
resisting folks who come along later to single-handedly retool

Make more sense? Wiki as a culture of millions might be "just do it,"
but we are using it mainly as a convenient collaboration environment
and, so, needn't subject ourselves to anarchy.

But, hey, if it's "Wild, Wild West or nothing" then yippee ki yay and
get outta my way, and I'll "protect" my own structures myself; i.e.
rolling back any changes to core organization or structures: that's
"just do it," too, and thus should be as valid as someone wandering in
from the blue and retooling it on a whim, right?

...or will a consensus of the majority of Rabbits form to decide which
of us dueling editors wins the shoot-out? If so... uh, then let's get
that there consensus from the majority of participants, like, now, eh?

Sorry so long, but I have generally heard "it's a wiki so just do it"
WAY too many times on these lists only to discover that there are
standards, policies, best practices, and existing consensuses which I am
violating. (And, FWIW, I have also heard it often enough that I can
assure the whole list that I needn't be told it again, thanks; I have a
decent enough memory to recall it.)