Re: [Citizendium-l] Consumer information database

[Dax]

            How about we try to come up with some basic policy that might allow for such an undertaking to be carried out, if we can come up with some good solutions to the problems already presented maybe we can actually go through with this. Here are some of my ideas concerning this consumer information database.

            Naturally basic products that are produced by many companies would be more difficult to keep neutral if we were to link consumers to producers. However in this case the product is more likely to be well understood by many people thus making it easier to keep the content of a wiki neutral. The only draw back might be not allowing links to be posted directing consumers to product websites because of (1) shear amount, (2) the fact that links will be ordered and (3) the possibility of missing producers. Not allowing links for this type of product would keep CZ neutral. Examples of products in this case would be body wash, detergent, cars, watches and or clothing. A solution to at least the ordering of links could be solved by a way of randomizing them. That way each time a person opens the page a random link will be at the top of the list therefore keeping the article neutral. This could be a solution if there are a definite number of producers.

            However a product produced by only one company because of patents, monoplies or otherwise presents the opposite effect. The effect being that fewer people would know of the product and most of the information about the product would come directly from the company. Of course in this case a link should be permitted because of the simple fact that it is the only company creating the product thereby not subjecting CZ to concerns of neutrality. The concern of neutrality in this case is the content of the wiki. I cannot think of a product like this at the moment but I would assume it would follow the form of new medicine design to a treat certain disease or problem, ect. The only solution to this would be the non-profit organization, already mentioned, to review the product and would act as the "expert opinion".

            I am certain all would agree CZ cannot become a place for advertisement and so any attempts by producers to this extent would take away from the credibility of CZ.

            I do think this is possible. Unfortunately the policy concerning this part of CZ could get a little complicated because of the gain a person could potential obtain from posting information about a product. Maybe a place to begin is modeling this database off of MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheets). It is only an idea; I realize that this consumer database will be far more complicated. What are some other thoughts?

On 10/31/06, Ori Redler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

A few points related to the "consumer information database":

A. Whomever is this "major player" makes a lot of difference. There are some players, once their identity known, that will drive away contributors and will mar CZs name. Others will possibly cast shadows over CZs objectivity and independence. 

B. The Wiki software simply would not do for a really comprehensive database. It's sub-par as it is for the limited task at hand. It is simply not good, flexible or extensible enough (structurally speaking) to carry a load that would be a 100 times larger. It may not be a bad idea to get money to develop CZ and also develop a tool suitable for such a task, but we should not delude ourselves that it can be done with the wiki. 

C. You wrote that "There is no *good* reason that I can see why this should not be part of the same database that is the Citizendium.  What is needed, for articles about Kings and philosophers, and for products, is a neutral source of general information." -- while this may be true, those are two distinct products. While both are written with the aim to be neutral, An encyclopaedia sort out and ranks information, thus turning it into knowledge. The main task of writing an encyclopaedic article is selecting sources and ranking them by some order of importance. This is how human thinking (knowledge) turn data into valuable information. A database does not and should not -- it must remain a collection of data which can be sorted, but not ranked. 

Ori

On 31 Oct 2006, at 22:50, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

From: "Larry Sanger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Date: 31 October 2006 22:18:04 GMT+02:00

To: <citizendium-l@lists.purdue.edu>

Subject: [Citizendium-l] Consumer information database

All,

I've been approached by and will soon meet face-to-face with a major player

online who may be interested in supporting a consumer information database.

This could result in *large* amounts of support for CZ.  So, I'd like to ask

you to help me think through the opportunity and the best way to approach

it.

In a global economy, with new companies and new products appearing all the

time, with the main source of consumer information being manipulative

commercials and box labels, what could be more valuable to the world than a

*truly neutral* source of information about products?

The idea requires that we radically expand the notion of what is included in

an encyclopedia, to encompass, well, *anything* of general interest.   It

would really put the meat on the bones of "the citizens' compendium of

everything."  It would involve information about every product (and, perhaps

in time, every business, and every movie, and every song...) that someone

wanted to be listed.  This is crazy, of course.  But there is a major player

who might provide truly significant support to help us bring it into being.

The *only* way to make this feasible, I think, is to create a groundswell of

public support for the project.  For that to happen, there must be, as well,

a *credible non-profit* organization behind it; the development of the

database must be maximally open and transparent; the results must be open

content, of course; and the system whereby information is input is as simple

as possible.

But the *first and most important* constraint on this project that came to

my mind when I started thinking about it is that the information must be

neutral, and there must be effective (but still efficient!) ways to make

sure that the information remains neutral.  We must tread *very* carefully

if we want to become a purveyor of consumer information, because the

financial interests who might want to get involved could make it *so* easy,

of course, to corrupt the fairness and reliability of the database.  But the

best way to secure this is precisely for the project to be maximally public,

open, and transparent.

Another constraint is that entries for products should not be flat wiki

pages, but database entries, with preassigned fields, and of course with

fields differing depending on product type.  In every other respect,

however, it could be a wiki.

There is no *good* reason that I can see why this should not be part of the

same database that is the Citizendium.  What is needed, for articles about

Kings and philosophers, and for products, is a neutral source of general

information.

One last thing to mention is that, in negotiating with this major online

player, we walk a fine line.  We want to provide this entity an incentive to

support the Citizendium.  But we cannot do that and compromise the

neutrality of the database.  The question that I will be thinking a great

deal about is why they should support a non-profit organization that is

committed to neutrality.  What reason can I give them?  Of course, if I can

give them no persuasive reasons, then we won't pursue the opportunity.

--Larry

an/listinfo/citizendium-l

_______________________________________________
Citizendium-l mailing list
Citizendium-l@lists.purdue.edu
https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/citizendium-l

_______________________________________________
Citizendium-l mailing list
Citizendium-l@lists.purdue.edu
https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/citizendium-l