Talk:Personnel
From ENHLDWiki
Back in the spring...
Bumping this up and reiterating the question. Please comment.
.. We talked about putting the access codes on the "Members Only" section of the CPR website. How do people feel about that? Or is it preferable to "invite in" people nominated by the existing group? Dick 14:39, 27 October 2007 (CDT)
Topic: Criteria for including other participants
This discussion is copied from e-mail where it began. To join in, just click "edit" at the top and add your comments below those already present.
Hi Virtual Historic Buttians.
Can you all think about the kinds of guidelines we ought to have for letting other people "in" to our private wiki? There are plenty of knowledgeable and likely willing people out there, but I would not want to be publishing the access codes all over the place, at least not yet. If you have thoughts on good ways to handle this, please share them.
I'll be gone tomorrow (Thurs) thru Sat. to the Montana History Conference, where as you probably know one of the talks is about this project. So, there may well be interest expressed by people, soon.
I just didn't want to do this unilaterally, but prefer some thoughts or guidance from the group. -- Dick (10/17/07)
- Right now we have a global access logging sorta thing. That is to say, the access for seeing and editing the blog is currently done with one password and one username. There is no reason why we cant move to an individual username password setup. That would allow us to add contributers and if they cause trouble remove their access. its a pretty easy thing and i can show Dick how to do it, so that two of us can field the resulting emails.
- The there would still need to be a process, as shutting a contributer out for troublemaking probably would hurt some feelings.
- My guess is that the most workable solution as long as an existing contributer (not in otherwise poor standing with the rest of us) could sponsor a a new volunteer. Dick or I would give them access. Hopefully the conversational nature of the wiki will keep people from traipsing over each other and allow us to guide new users towards best practices. Though, eventually it would be necessary to have a monitor cruise the wiki making formating edits and generally keeping the peace.
- Just thoughts. -Max (10/18/07)
- Thanks Max for this. I support Max's ideas strongly, but if others have other ideas for the approach, please chime in.
- Given the likely friendly nature of anyone we give the global passwords to, I guess I don't feel at this point that we need to do it via individual access (Max's first paragraph above). But again please share your feelings about it.
- Regarding the idea of hurting someone's feelings for "shutting out" a troublemaker, my feeling is that it should be done by consensus within our community, as it is done in the "real" Wikipedia. If necessary, we can have "votes", but there are few enough of us, and we have (I think!) such similar goals for the project, that it should be possible to accomplish this "policing" through a discussion process, at least for now. Of course it is not as if anyone we are likely to "invite in" will be a malicious vandal, but I want you all to understand and agree to how we deal with such a thing if it does happen. -- Dick (10/21/07)
