Jump to navigation Jump to search
Note: this is NOT a vote! This is a collection of opinions, to see whether there is support in the community for this at all, or rather to collect major flaws.
- I must say, I highly support this bold move towards forming the council. As indicated, arguments over the more minor details are preventing this from moving to full completion, so the idea of an interim council to define what the final council will do is most certainly a good thing. Additionally, given that this body will be established by board resolution, I believe it is more likely to succeed in the long run, rather than a user-defined group with no real "official" endorsement. ^demon 15:39, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
- wow, this is so bad that it just might work, and as per ^demons, this council will definitely be successful.."power to the people" ...hehe..--Cometstyles 15:51, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
- Not a vote, but a comment, this seems an additional layer of governance for no apparent reason, a solution in search of a problem. I think the WMF has enough pressing issues facing it that dealing with this large and cumbersome new bureaucracy would seriously hinder it from dealing with those issues. So I oppose this idea at this time, although perhaps I'm missing something. ++Lar: t/c 15:53, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Major problems with the resolution
- Is September 1 realistic? Other than that, I do not see any issues.--Yaroslav Blanter 12:59, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
- I have wondered about that myself. Perhaps having a deadline will make the group work harder. :-) It's much too early to suggest having the deadline extended. Eclecticology 02:50, 17 March 2008 (UTC)