User blog comment:Obi the LEGO Fan/LMBW Committee/@comment-3444778-20130708142650/@comment-3444778-20130710131326

I don't want community input to be encouraged, that's what the committee project is all about. I want it to be required. I believe that everyone will step up and become a part of it, since they're not life-changing decisions. It's part of being an active community.

I can't draw out a map and predict all the benefits and drawbacks. It's a social experiment. But what I do know is that it will allow for more freedom on the user's part (see paragraph below). Bans and blocks are part of the admins' tasks, and are to be handled without discussion. Promotions should most certainly be discussed. Editing structure can be discussed. Extensions next to never come up, but when they do, they can be discussed. Rules need to be discussed.

This is not a case where we have an example to follow; not one that I know of, at least. It's a simple choice between a system that runs in the background while the community edits and chats and sometimes complains that the system doesn't work the way they want it to, or a system that the community builds and actively changes to best suit its needs. And because there are many different people on the wiki with many different ideas, the admins can't cover everything. About the community wanting it, this ideas seems to have been born in this comment chain, so I clearly haven't gotten that far yet. Right now I'm just trying to convince you that it's a better way to govern than the system we're using, which has no clear benefits with the exception of the fact that admin-only discussions are usually quicker and easier to keep track of, which doesn't even matter in the long run anyways.