Banning for meta-discusion [was RE: [uf-discuss]
previouslynon-referenced in the spec"References"]
ryan at technorati.com
Tue Jan 9 15:41:45 PST 2007
On Jan 4, 2007, at 2:33 AM, Joe Andrieu wrote:
> Tantek, there is no governance for uF other than by cabal, which
> historically has proven useful only in a limited scale. The
> alternative, of determining a means of governance, need not create a
> heavy bureaucracy, in fact, it can be liberating. Frankly, a more
> decentralized approach would do uF good. And that would require a
> set of explicit procedural standards and a huge release of authority.
> The obvious and/or naïve bureacratic options could easily create a
> of burdensome procedures, but there's no reason we would have to be
> naïve or choose the obvious.
FWIW, though it isn't obvious, we've been working on distributing the
administration of microformats.org. Much of this has happened rather
quietly on purpose, so that people can ease their way into more
responsibility and work as their comfort and confidence dictates.
More information about the microformats-discuss