Actually, what this change has done is encourage and pave the way for less collaboration.
I personally signed up because I loved the way wikitree was and what it promised me it would continue to be. Absolutely that included the parameters in place. Those privacy levels gave me confidence in the tree and that my contributions to it, given the acuracy of my work versus what I found all over the internet with regards to many of my ancestors, would be safe. I saw this as the perfect place to get the truth out there, backed up with sources, and for anyone in the world to find. And so I spent many many moons making contributions because I believed what I was told was the way of it.
Apart from passionate discussions here in g2g which not everyone who participates in wikitree participated in, there was no email to members about this major change, no oportunity given for all who have contributed and contribute to vote on this change. It was just made - like it or lump it!
And as for the future of all the information on wikitree, who will end up owning it, here's an interesting thread https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/391715/new-to-the-site-a-small-concern-about-ownership?show=391715#q391715 ~ food for thought.
As with many things that start out well and as a result get big and successful, this site/dream too has the potential for corruption. So I make no apology for wanting management of the profiles of my great great grandparents, and to be able to oversee changes made on them - why should I feel like I'm being non collaborative just because I feel that way!? I have been far from non-collaborative, a wikitree term bandied about more and more as some kind of badge of shame. And if I wanted to "own" profiles I would never have joined this site!
With the current rules my great grandfather's profile will be opened in less than three years as he was a victim of the Spanish Flu. Was this man your great grandfather too? Did you know his wife, my great grandmother, as intimately as I did? Why should I be made to feel like a selfish control freak simply because I don't want the oportunity to exist that his profile may be randomly edited during my and/or my mother's (his granddaughter) lifetimes? A death 100 years ago therefore deeming a profile must be fully open is extremely disrespectful to the living as well as to those passed.
The truth is, this change is NOT what we signed up for, simple. We signed up believing that when it came to our ancestors of the last 200 years we could allocate the settings we were comfortable with in order that we were comfortable creating profiles for them in the first place. I found that respectful and moral. This change is neither, and the way it has been implimented is neither.
Sure there are many who disagree, who would like to write my views off as non-collaborative, or wanting ownership, whatever they need to tell themselves is not my problem.
Frankly, I feel railroaded with this change, and I am far from alone in that. Like or not, doesn't change the fact.
I will stay at wikitree and I'll be monitoring the profiles I manage. Afterall I have put one hell of allot of time and energy and goodwill into all I have given to the tree to walk away. But that will be where my participation begins and ends henceforth.
So, if this is how you want even some of your members to feel ... carry on making big changes like this without across the board consultation. If not, I suggest in future, out of respect for all who have contributed to this site and it's success, you put your proposals to everybody. There is no excuse not to with todays technology, unless at the end of the day you simply don't care.
The ball in in your court wikitree.