Five proposed goals

Truthfully, I have no idea about financing. I know it's a concern that some people have raised. And then there are people who say "don't worry, things are fine". I also don't know how much it would cost to fuel some of these initiatives. I really don't know.

As for community conflict, you raise a good point. We need to be specific. If I had to break it down:

  • Debate is good, conflict is natural. It helps us figure out what's best.
  • Conflict is bad when it becomes hostile (e.g.: personal attacks) or stubborn (e.g.: no interest in actually building a consensus).
  • The community does a decent job of dealing with hostility, although it looks like they often look the other way for active contributors.
  • The community is worse at dealing with stubbornness. (According to the survey.)
  • Stubborn control of articles seems to drive off new users, and otherwise frustrate all but the most "dedicated" volunteers.
  • Stubborn control/filibustering of policy limits the community's ability to adapt and respond to content and behavioral trends.

When I distilled it down, I said "reduce conflict and hostility". But obviously something got lost in the translation.

Randomran16:54, 27 April 2010

I incorporated the goals you suggested into the other priorities. I made finance an explicit part of operations, and I incorporated some notes on community health in the two participation priorities. I removed the quality goal you added, as I think that's covered implicitly by the theory of change and the reach and participation priorities.

Eekim14:08, 4 May 2010

Makes sense. I made a few small amendments. Hopefully it's still on track, and the point is still clear.

Randomran19:10, 4 May 2010