[uf-discuss] Unjust banning of Andy Mabbett

Jesse Rodgers jrrodgers at gmail.com
Sat Mar 15 19:09:36 PST 2008

On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 4:58 PM, Eric A. Meyer <eric at meyerweb.com> wrote:
>     I don't think anyone's ever been voted into the position of
>  anything in the microformats community, because it's really not a
>  process-driven kind of place.  There's no process for approving new
>  microformats, for example, so it doesn't much surprise me that
>  there's no hard process for things like appointing list
>  administrators.  Heck, back in the days of creating XFN, our only
>  process was that we looked at established usage patterns to derive
>  values, pared down our list of possible values fairly ruthlessly, and
>  didn't include anything that didn't get a unanimous approval of the
>  three of us.  And then we wrote it up.  That was it.

...and this process is fine but it lacks credibility to those that
don't go to SXSW. There are some that take these things pretty
seriously and the loose sense of organization is pretty hard to
respect. There is a risk that without the formality, leadership, and
strength then why doesn't IE8 rename things and add a little bit here
and there? How about Google? They may want their own gCal format
because hCal is just a hobby. Does the microformats community require
formality in order to retain consistency in those that think they know

There doesn't seem to be a total community upheaval for either side of
this issue, not sure what that means.  Maybe people don't care or are
like me and on the fence. I think too much formal process, elections,
etc get you into an issue where 'he/she with the most time wins' as
with any volunteer organization.

There is a risk that this could all be replaced and all that work
forgotten... details of this thread aside, perhaps a little benevolent
leadership is required to direct the community?


More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list