Wikicracy/Frequently asked questions
Frequently asked questions
[edit]The following are answers to general comments and criticisms received about the project.
Q: Yet another wiki website?
[edit]- Not exactly. We propose to develop a new wiki software, or more precisely wiki software improvements for decision making processes. A platform that could then be used to create the wikis based on debate (as opposed to wikis based on factual information)
Q: Are you sure it is worth the investment?
[edit]- No. Who cares anyway ?
- Yes:
- Many people have tried to use wikis for organizing debate websites, and there has been many projects to create these kind of wikis, but most of them couldn't develop well because wiki is not (yet) adapted to their specificity.
- More generally, just like there was a huge need for good encyclopedic information, there is a huge need for good debate and adoption process of solutions proposals. Many (if not most of) countries, organizations, associations, parties find it very difficult to adopt a good organization where its members can all contribute to the decision making process. This project has the ambition to become a think tank for improvement of democracy (whose basic idea is to have the participation of all to the decisions that concern them)
Q: Does Wikicracy compete with wiki Wikipedia, Wikibate, Wikiforum, Wikireason or Wikireason:Wikireason:related projects ?
[edit]- No. Wikipedia, as well as a most (but not all) official wikimedia wikis, are dedicated to gather free content of quality, thanks to the participation of virtually anyone with access to internet and the work of the community. This project purpose is not to about gathering content. It is not about debating on specific issues either, or setting pools, or whatever.
- No. This project is about developing further the wiki software so that we can use it better for cooperative working on issues (propositions and debate) / and for decision making (votes) / and for elections. It is not impossible to do that with the wiki software as it is, but is not very functional however. (not easy to organize a vote and build proposals on a traditional wiki...)
- Yes. It competes with wikis, because resources/time that would be used and efforts that would be made by programmers to develop this platform will not be available for improving even further wikimedia and other information based wikis projects.
Q: Does it concern wikimedia?
[edit]- No. It sounds like your are just proposing an online debating society, which really isn't something the Wikimedia Foundation would have anything to do with. It will never be a Wikimedia project.
- Yes. The wikimedia foundation is not only dedicated to free knowledge for all, but is also promoting projects that respects its philosophy, projects where the idea that everyone shall be able to participate to the contents of webpages, for the benefit of all. On the main page is stated "Welcome to Meta-Wiki, a website devoted to the coordination of the Wikimedia Foundation's projects, including Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, and the MediaWiki software on which it runs", therefore, project on improvement of the MediaWiki has its place here
Q: Why voting? And why the need of elections? Shouldn't democracy be the work of all? If the people vote for representative, then they won't participate anymore.
[edit]- whereas we have all the time we want to improve little by little the knowledge in all fields, the action matter is by essence different: we want and we have to take decisions. (And we sometimes have to take them very fast before it is too late). At the time an action must be taken, members may not have reached a consensus. And in a very large group of people with different opposing interests, you can statistically never reach a perfect consensus, you will always find people to oppose any proposal. Therefore in the field of action, we cannot afford to wait everyone agrees, or we will probably never do anything.
- On the opposite, a decision taken by just a majority (or worse, by a minority) will lead to serious doubts in the quality of the decisions. This is why I propose that any decision taken shall continue to be discussed if the issue it was supposed to solve remains after taken action. This until the issue is solved or a consensus on what shall be done is reached. Wiki-based cooperation guidelines will help to build proposals through cooperation, and thus help to reach the largest possible consensus.
- For a matter of efficiency, we need people to organize the actions based on the proposals. Whereas a proposal need the maximum of ideas to reach a good level, some people shall accept to take responsibility of its implementation. And these people shall be recognized as the best to succeed in their mission. The election is the way by which we can select the candidates the most recognized for the mission they are asked to take responsibility for.
Q: (Your question) ?
[edit]- (proposal of answers.)