* http://blog.k1v1n.com/2009/08/if-tree-falls-in-forest-part-1.html
**
** He thinks that experts have a moral obligation to contribute to
** Wikipedia, because it's the source people actually go to.
*
Just to be clear, I didn't say anything in the post about experts having a
moral obligation to
On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 8:14 PM, Kevin Gamble kevin.gam...@extension.orgwrote:
* http://blog.k1v1n.com/2009/08/if-tree-falls-in-forest-part-1.html
**
** He thinks that experts have a moral obligation to contribute to
** Wikipedia, because it's the source people actually go to.
*
Just to be
http://blog.k1v1n.com/2009/08/if-tree-falls-in-forest-part-1.html
He thinks that experts have a moral obligation to contribute to
Wikipedia, because it's the source people actually go to.
(I added a comment that experts without patience for Wikipedia's little
ways can contribute by adding a note
on 8/2/09 12:26 PM, David Gerard at dger...@gmail.com wrote:
http://blog.k1v1n.com/2009/08/if-tree-falls-in-forest-part-1.html
He thinks that experts have a moral obligation to contribute to
Wikipedia, because it's the source people actually go to.
The moral obligation is in ensuring the
On 02/08/2009, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
http://blog.k1v1n.com/2009/08/if-tree-falls-in-forest-part-1.html
He thinks that experts have a moral obligation to contribute to
Wikipedia, because it's the source people actually go to.
Dunno about that. I do know that an expert can be
David Gerard wrote:
http://blog.k1v1n.com/2009/08/if-tree-falls-in-forest-part-1.html
He thinks that experts have a moral obligation to contribute to
Wikipedia, because it's the source people actually go to.
So first you need to show that there is an obligation to do anything
[[pro bono
On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 8:14 PM, Charles
Matthewscharles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
snip
How about the simpler comment that if you have expertise in an area of
public interest, you should consider writing something freely licensed
and putting it on the Web where someone can find it and
Do experts have an obligation? No. Educators and those whose goal is
to improve the world's knowledge, yes. And everyone has a motivation
to contribute driven by public interest, but not everyone recognizes
it.
On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Carcharothcarcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
On
As a Randian I would have to say that no, I have no moral obligation to
give up my effort for any compensation other than that compensation which I
declare as my due.
This is not to say that Ayn Rand would not contribute, only that the
compensation of such contribution must be that which
Only as much as off-duty doctors, lifeguards, EMTs, etc. have to
attempt to save someone's life. Good-samaritan laws exist for a
reason.
~A
On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 12:26, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
http://blog.k1v1n.com/2009/08/if-tree-falls-in-forest-part-1.html
He thinks that
On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 9:26 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
http://blog.k1v1n.com/2009/08/if-tree-falls-in-forest-part-1.html
He thinks that experts have a moral obligation to contribute to
Wikipedia, because it's the source people actually go to.
I don't think I'd ever go chiding
But who is heard when people read a Wikipedia article? *An expert* is not
heard, that is, no particular expert is heard, because we have no
attribution. Cited sources are heard, where sources are cited, for a
particular
sentence. But even then we get citation creep when those sentences
Charles Matthews wrote:
How about the simpler comment that if you have expertise in an area of
public interest, you should consider writing something freely licensed
and putting it on the Web where someone can find it and help aggregate
it?
This is a really good point.
Subject-matter
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Ben Kovitzbkov...@acm.org wrote:
Wikipedia-editing is pretty far removed from subject-matter
expertise. It's more about searching and summarizing and
collaborating. It's closer to being a librarian than any other
occupation.
Librarian? Nah. There are lots of
14 matches
Mail list logo
