Official
Fragment of a discussion from Talk:Strategic Plan/Role of the WMF
So.... the concern is that we are careful to see community strengthening as a means to an end, and not merely strengthen a community without regard to what that community may be doing? And perhaps more guidance from WMF to communities on project principles, priorities, and a bit less "hands off", more concerned whether communities grow to be functional or dysfunctional?
The wording then would be objected to because it suggests or implies a flawed (mis) understanding of this point and misdirects focus to the communities unconditionally (however they may work) rather than to the project's core goal of producing high quality free knowledge?
