4 ms·
> publically announces That’s how RfCs work—they’re public by nature, so that people can comment. It’s hardly feasible not to then promulgate the outcome. > t
by eynsham 5y ago
> publically announces
That’s how RfCs work—they’re public by nature, so that people can comment. It’s hardly feasible not to then promulgate the outcome.
> they stop accepting certain forms of donations
They haven’t. This is a proposal through an RfC. The foundation may or may not accept it.
> organization isn't particularly starving for donations
Well it isn’t, so that’s a good thing. People should stop donating to the foundation for a while. Hopefully the bureaucracy will be slashed.
- baobabKoodaa 5y agoThanks for the clarifications. I misread the title and assumed that the RFC had been passed.
- eynsham 5y agoThe RfC is passed but the effect of that is to make a request. Imagine you and I were to form a committee to discuss, e.g., landscaping in municipal gardens: we might pass a motion to suggest planting different flowers, but that would amount only to a request to the gardeners/the competent authority.
- baobabKoodaa 5y agoOkay. I'm not familiar with Wikipedia politics so it seems I used incorrect term again.
- topranks 5y agoYour confusing the Wikipedia community of users, which anyone is free to participate in, and have passed this RFC, with the Wikimedia Foundation, which accepts donations and runs the systems and networks that Wikipedia runs on. https://networkcultures.org/cpov/2010/03/27/mayo-fuster-morell-the-role-of-the-wikimedia-foundation/ https://networkcultures.org/cpov/2010/03/27/mayo-fuster-more... Such hybrid and “community” driven systems are far from problem-free. But this one has created Wikipedia, which most people think is a good thing. Obviously it’s tricky to walk the line.