Re: Business cards

Christopher Mahan a écrit:
> --- notafish <notafishz-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > OK, sorry for digging out old conversations, I've been dead for the
> > past 5 days, and just resurrected for a few hours. So here goes.
> >
> >
> > > > This said, I stand up to my opinion that mentions of stewards
> > or
> >
> > > > arbitrators of the english AC has basically nothing to do here.
> > These
> >
> > > > positions do not exist in the real world. They mean nothing to
> > those
> >
> > > > outside wikipedia. They are unrelated to the Foundation itself.
> > And
> >
> > > > they are only part of the status existing on the projects.
> > >
> > > Well, there are apparently plans to form Arbitration Committees
> >
> > on other
> >
> > > language versions of Wikipedia, so it's not en:-centric (or not
> >
> > intended to
> >
> > > be). Thus Arbitrator status, and certainly, of course, Stewards,
> >
> > are
> >
> > > Wikimedia-project-wide, and the people who will receive these
> >
> > cards will
> >
> > > understand that they confer extra 'status' of some kind, as you
> >
> > say. Neither
> >
> > > job are particularly easy to do, and a small amount of thanks
> >
> > like this is
> >
> > > perhaps not a bad thing.
> >
> > Having a card, imho, has nothing to do with getting any thanks for
> > a
> > job well done within wikipedia or any other project, but more about
> > having (or not having) a right to speak about certain matters with
> > a
> > more or less official position. Arbitrators, Stewards are all, as
> > Anthere pointed out, positions within the projects, but not
> > positions
> > that mean that you have a right to talk about the Moogle Deal of
> > the
> > Fahoo proposition or a right to sell Wikipedia and all other
> > projects
> > to the next Moohoo buyer who comes along. Of course, I am going a
> > bit
> > far, here, but this is what a "card" could entitle to do.
> >
> > So no, they should not be given out as thanks, but as an exact
> > description of who does what in the Wikimedia Foundation and
> > projects,
> > and who can say "we" when talking about the Foundation, or
> > Wikimedia
> > Deutschland, or Wikimedia France. People in general, journalists in
> > particular, are very wary of who their source is, but will be
> > fooled
> > by a little square of paper. A "business card" gives a credibility
> > that some of us certainly do not have, and some of us certainly do
> > not
> > deserve. So let us be careful when handing out those "cards".
>
>
> Samples of titles:
>
> Wikipedia Administrator
> Wikimedia Software Developer
> Wikimedia Senior Systems Engineer
> Contributing Editor
> Arbitration Committee Panelist 2005
> WikiNews Freelance Photographer
> and so on.
>
> I see nothing in there that says they can speak 'for' the foundation.
> There should be a link to Wikimedia Foundation's formal contacts on
> each card, like this: www.wikimedia.com/press and an explanation on
> that page of what cards there are, who has them, and so on. This will
> allow the press people to understand who the cardbearer is and what
> they do.

you forgot mediators.

But I think that for press curiosity, it would be interesting to have a 
couple of very short pages to define this.

Ant