Wikipedia seems to rely heavily both on a huge bureaucratic hierarchy and a whole lot of democracy to make its decisions. Groupprops, so far, has had neither. Currently, we intend to remain a centralized, tight-knit place where all decisions are taken by the administrators after discussion with parties in goodwill rather than through long debates and voting mechanisms.
Think of Wikipedia as a large multinational corporation that has partly ''gone public'' and hence has to listen to its ''minor shareholders (the ordinary users) but more so to its major shareholders (the people who control it). Contrast this with Groupprops, which is a small company on the street selling some goods that ''may'' clash with Wikipedia on some counts.
Groupporps is run by a few people who have a particular vision and they welcome others inside provided those peopel share the same vision. Otherwise, people
are free to leave and go elsewhere.