Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-116693-20130624201511/@comment-116693-20130624224510

Great :-)

Added a few comments to my first post in the article; interested to see your responses, especially as regards administration. This is obviously a sensitive issue for all of us; wiki founders are, by nature, leaders. And we all like to have full control over a wide range of things. With that in mind, I think it's important to make sure that we're working collaboratively instead of against each other. I have little desire to butt heads over anything on here, but I know we will all share different views on certain aspects of the site as we move forward. Even more importantly, it seems like it would be far more efficient to split the workload so that we don't have to get everyone's agreement (which could be difficult to obtain) on every aspect of the site merge. Just seems like, rather than trying to reach unanimous consensus on every little thing, it would be a lot easier for us to comment on things we're not "final decisionmakers" on and let someone else decide, and then take other people's feedback into account and make a final decision on our areas of responsibility.

What are your thoughts on splitting up the "final decisionmaking" authority, and if you're amenable, how would you ideally envision such a split?