[Wylug-admin] Re: admin wiki - openness

[Dave Fisher]

On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 12:26:42PM +0100, James Holden wrote:
> Hi John,
> 
> On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 11:30:00AM +0100, John Leach wrote:
> > Just my opinion on open-ness:  The wylug-admin stuff does appear to be a
> > bit secret to an outsider - I'm sure not deliberately.  I'd recommend
> > doing everything we can to encourage contributions on the running of
> > wylug so we need to do more to open this up.  The wiki would probably be
> > a good start.  Let's make it as public as we can.  
> 
> It's probably because there's always really been one person doing the
> organising, if we're honest.
> 
> I deliberated about whether to keep the wiki closed or open, and decided
> that closed would be better to protect the private bits of information
> and prevent spammage, but.......

As suggested the list has never been a deliberate secret, but from my
perspective, there were a few good reasons for not inviting every wylug
member to participate in it:

  1. It was our primary *tool* for *co-ordination*

  2. It was *not* intended to be a talking shop

  3. Like pretty much every voluntary organisation, wylug has plenty of
     people who can find the time to express an opinion, but can't seem
     to find the time to actually do the work in realising their
     suggestions.

I'd be happy to have most wiki pages open for all to edit, but I'd be
completely against letting 'free riders' mess about with actionable
items that have already been agreed by those who actually do the work.

For example:

  1. Assuming Phil Driscol is organising speakers, he should
     have complete editorial control of the agreed list of speakers.

  2. Separate lists of suggested speakers and suggested topics could be
     edited by all ... with strong recommendations that contributions
     are additive, i.e. members don't delete other people's suggestions
     unless they are clearly libelous. If they are just stupid, add a
     polite comment, explaining why.

While I'd also be totally opposed to letting idle chatter get in the way of
those who need to use parts of the wiki for arriving at administrative
decisions, I don't think that matters so much, since Wikis are lousy
forums for decision-making ... let's keep the mailing list for that.

Dave