![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/6435c3e8843adf6ba683f32a7aea0e0e.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
It's simple, Richard: - you want to question, contest or otherwise undermine presuppositions that will require to (re) build part of the context behind the initiative and trigger further arguments? awesome! start new topic on the docs ML or on GitHub, so that other volunteers working with me can have their voices heard too (I am not their speakperson outside of the scope of the request at the origin of this thread and they are not subscribed to this ML let alone follow this topic) - you want to help in a way that complies with the request at the origin of the topic? nice, that's the right topic! Have a nice week! Le 08/08/2021 à 12:32, Richard Brown a écrit :
On 8. Aug 2021, at 12:09, Adrien Glauser
wrote: - if Richard is interested in helping us in a constructive way, he is kindly invited to send us or send me (off thread) the name of five of the principal authors of the contents of the wikis he thinks should be referenced in the revamped docs. Usually I would simply use the top five contributors from https://en.opensuse.org/Special:Contributions but this tool apparently does not work as of this email.
A few immediate questions
1. Why should I (or anyone else) be compelled to work constructively with this initiative? As others have already commented, this endeavour seems to be operating with no public explanation as to their goals or the intended benefits to the Project. Without such justification, I’m not even in a position to consider whether I’d even want to help this.
2. Why should this be the decision of just 5 people? The wiki is the authoritative source of huge amounts of our projects work, is contributed to by hundreds and is used by thousands of people. Who are you to say that the top 5 contributors are the only people you’d need to listen to?
I think the change of the projects main documentation platform should be discussed by the whole project (with extra weight given to the existing contributors who’d be impacted by any change). the needs of the whole project should be considered, but so should the existing contributiors be considered if their continued contribution is desired.
3. Why the double standard? You expect folk like me to engage constructively with your efforts when those efforts are clearly destructive to the existing wiki and the contribution accessibility of existing wiki contributors? I think you’d find far more constructive feedback if you weren’t talking about deprecating a heavily used platform and dismissing/ignoring-as-offtopic the questions of the existing users & contributors of that platform.