On 12/8/2011 8:00 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> A "collaborative page" can easily go sideways with contributors who don't
> understand the parameters of what is meant to be there
In the IETF? Folks can misunderstand or getting carried away or both?
tsk, tsk.
But seriously, my general impression is that the comments and suggestion people
post on the venue mailing list are typically pretty good. So serious
misinformation or misbehavior seem less likely than for a controversial working
group, IMO.
We can rely on group review and reaction, for catching the problem you cite.
On 12/8/2011 8:36 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
What is the greater additional value of having to have someone who watches
the wiki and reverts changes over that same person being listed on the static
page as "if you have questions or suggestions about this page, please send
mail to<real human's name>"?
Huge.
They are fundamentally different models in terms of effort and responsiveness.
A reactive model -- watch and fix -- is much less effort, for a well-functioning
wiki than is a proactive model with highly constrained access. The monitor is
not in the critical path; they are not a gatekeeper who slows things down.
The reactive model distributes work among those motivated to perform it, rather
than concentrating everything onto the one or few people in charge.
If the reactive model fails, it is usually due to a dysfunctional group, in
which case the model isn't the problem.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf