https://rocwiki.org/Lead_Contributors/TalkRecent Changes of the page "Lead Contributors/Talk" on Rochester Wiki.en-us https://rocwiki.org/Lead_Contributors/Talkhttps://rocwiki.org/Lead_Contributors/Talk?action=diff&version1=1&version2=2&ts=11460692862006-04-26T16:34:46ZFarMcKon <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Lead Contributors/Talk<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 1: </td> <td> Line 1: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> <span><br> -</span> [[Comments(What do you think?)]] </td> <td> <span>+</span> <span>Go to the parent page, ["Lead Contributors"].</span> [[Comments(What do you think?)]] </td> </tr> </table> </div> https://rocwiki.org/Lead_Contributors/Talkhttps://rocwiki.org/Lead_Contributors/Talk?action=diff&version1=0&version2=1&ts=11460692582006-04-26T16:34:18ZFarMcKonmoved discussion here <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Lead Contributors/Talk<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 1: </td> <td> Line 1: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + [[Comments(What do you think?)]]<br> + <br> + ''2006-03-15 16:32:08'' [[nbsp]] I would be happy to contribute to this. --["MikeThomas"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2006-03-15 20:16:13'' [[nbsp]] How do other community-based wikis deal with this? I'd be happy to have an "editorial board" or something similar to provide some direction. --["TomMaszerowski"]<br> + ''At Davis Wiki we don't have anything like this, but I think it's going to need to happen. So, we'll follow your lead :)'' --["PhilipNeustrom"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2006-03-16 11:39:00'' [[nbsp]] Due to the way a Wiki works, isn't it de facto that lead contributors act as an editorial board? --["JasonOlshefsky"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2006-03-16 15:04:17'' [[nbsp]] if by 'editorial board' you mean an activist group that edits pages for political/sanity reasons, nope. If you mean the people who have the final say if there is a conflict of viewpoints/personalities, then yes. --["FarMcKon"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2006-03-16 15:50:02'' [[nbsp]] The latter is what I meant by direction. That's why I used the quotes. I don't think a heavy-handed approach is appropriate here. --["TomMaszerowski"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2006-03-16 15:55:26'' [[nbsp]] I don't see any conflict that has required a 'final say' so far. I think the energy that would go into deciding who the chosen few are could be better spent improving the wiki itself. It ain't broke - why fix it? --["RottenChester"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2006-03-16 15:56:06'' [[nbsp]] Take care not to designate an editorial board. Unlike newspapers, [http://del.icio.us/jlam/wiki+law wikis and other online services enjoy wide immunity] from libel posted by users. --["JohnLam"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2006-03-17 01:20:39'' [[nbsp]] I agree with Rotten &amp; Lam (sounds like a law firm there). I would like to see some money accumulate to pay for getting the word out (like the awsome bumper stickers), and maybe pay for some of our hosting costs. I would like to have the design of the site 'approved' (at least rubber stamped) so it's not just whoever had R00t on that day's idea. I would like to have some kind of 'face' so that someone can go to things like 'digital rochester' and be able to 'speak for the wiki' is a sense. These are the types of things I would like to see the lead contribs work with. '''Now''', this is just my first-pass ideas. Some may be worse (or better) than I first think of them (like the editorial comments). If you spot problems, please point them out. --["FarMcKon"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div>