MESSAGE
| DATE | 2005-12-28 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Subject: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Free Software faults part 3
|
________________________________________________
So now everyone can be an expert in a
field they know nothing about without
having to back up any facts? What a
strange way to create an encyclopedia.
These stories coming out about Wikipedia
and how it is compiled make it sound
more like a joke every day. Maybe this
is just a big conspiracy to dumb down
the population in some form of 1984
scenario :-)
Cheers,
M Allen
PS. My dictionary wants to replace
"Wikipedia" with "Wiped" or "Wimped".
Seems a close enough match for me....
________________________________________________
Reading your article made me think of
something that I hadn't thought of in
years. When I was first learning to
drive at 11 or 12 on the farm back in
rural Arkansas, my father's first words
about driving, "a car, a tractor, a
truck is a machine: it will go in which
ever way it is pointed and will run over
everything and everyone in its path
until it is stopped. Machines don't
think. People think."
My suspicion of the Wikipediac, Web 2.0,
herd mind, etc crowd is composed of
nitwits who have forgotten that it is
all about the machines. They
conveniently forget about the machines
because they don't have any mechanical
ability to speak of. When was the last
time any of them actually fixed
something and didn't "have their guy"
fix it?
"It's the Hive Mind wot dunnit. Not me"
The next time the windshield washer
fluid on their car needs filling let the
herd mind do it. Or let the herd mind
put together the Christmas gifts that
require "some assembly" with
instructions only available in often
intelligible English.
The dream of the herd mindians is that
they don't want to have do for
themselves, and failing that, not have
to deal with other people, figuring a
machine that could do it, would call
their manhood into question for not
being able to connect their dvd player
to their tv.
And if nothing else, please don't use
that nonsensical phrase "hive mind" if
nothing else it's an insult to honey
bees who can at least make something. A
"hive" and a "herd" are not that much
different. And "herd" at least has
connotations of bovines standing around
in an open field staring blankly into
space as the world goes by.
Tim
________________________________________________
Vandalized
There are two sides to Wikipedia:
* Wikipedia as website, which gets
used as source of information by
people (whether they are right
in doing this is another
discussion).
* Wikipedia the editing community.
* Wikipedia-the-editing-community
is just like any community,
especially like any community
that is enabled by some
electronic means. Like any
community, it will have
outcasts. Like any community
(especially the ones that form
via some form of electronic
communication) it likes to
belittle 'newbies'. Like any
community, there will be
flamewars. Like any community,
there will be the right way of
doing things, inside jargon,
inside knowledge (see/hear Adam
Curry's rant about wiki markup
and how that kept him from
fixing the 'podcasting' entry)
inside jokes, things that will
improve your standing and things
that will get you dropped like a
brick. Just like the average web
forum, or like a Usenet
newsgroup, Fidonet echoes and
BBS discussion boards.
But the webforum spits out a
newbie, the Usenet newsgroup
flames him/her to a nice crisp,
and life continues with one
irritated person.
Wikipedia-the-editing-community
has more effect: they edit
Wikipedia. In their style. The
thing that struck me is that the
line about John Seigenthaler Sr.
was in a style that fits with
Wikipedia. Hoax or not, writing
"was thought to have been
directly involved" sounds more
Wikipedia than "is a
". So if you're an
expert on a topic, simply
writing your expert opinion as
truth will get your writings
removed fast because that's not
the Wikipedia style.
This is why 'if you think it is
wrong, just edit it!' will not
work out.
Can this change? Probably not
without offending a large part
of the membership of that
Wikipedia-editing-community.
Koos van den Hout
________________________________________________
And if Koos is right, Wikipedia is working out
exactly as designed.
I'm utterly sick of your publication's
continued bashing of the Wikipedia.
Truth by committee works god dammit!
Just look at government!
Sarcastically Yours.
G-man
________________________________________________
The thing that all the techno utopians
seem to forget is that not all things
are like the Federation. Hell, even the
writers of Star Trek weren't as
unrealistic as to think that!
What those badger lovers have to
understand is that even when 99.999% of
your users act responsibly, you still
have to act to keep the arseholes in
check; and that the definition of an
arsehole is not someone who suggests
that a warp core breach is imminent...
especially not when there are flashing
lights and the link confirming the fact.
Richard
________________________________________________
Thanks, all.®
Related stories
$10m for a Wikipedia for grown-ups (19 December 2005)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/19/sanger_onlinepedia_with_experts/
Wikipedia science 31% more cronky than Britannica's (16 December 2005)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/16/wikipedia_britannica_science_comparison/
Linux zealots proud to be as miserable as planes (12 December 2005)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/12/otto_linux_flyletters/
There's no Wikipedia entry for 'moral responsibility' (12 December 2005)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/12/wikipedia_no_responsibility/
Who owns your Wikipedia bio? (6 December 2005)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/06/wikipedia_bio/
Why Wikipedia isn't like Linux (27 October 2005)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/27/wikipedia_britannica_and_linux/
Wikipedia: magic, monkeys and typewriters (24 October 2005)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/24/wikipedia_letters/
Wikipedia founder admits to serious quality problems (18 October 2005)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/18/wikipedia_quality_problem/
© Copyright 2005
|
|
