>>> Using wikibooks.org sounds attractive, but I don't see any protection
>>> against spamming. And that is exactly what happens to the Vim tips.
>>> It's just a matter of time before this happens on wikibooks.org too.
>>
>> I agree that spam protection should be our top priority.
>
> Why ? We already have the spam problem and while annoying it doesn't
> negate the value of the tips themselves. Sure it's important, but the
> quality and quantity of content should be top priority shouldn't it?
I guess I should have said the following:
I agree that we should balance accessibility with good spam
protection.
> That aside - if wikibooks doesn't seem to have the spam problem now I
> don't think it's appropriate to dismiss them just because we don't
> _think_ it will work. Proof is in the pudding - wikipedia and
> wikibooks seem to prove it _does_ work.
I don't think that anyone is rejecting Wikibooks outright. I think that
they should be on our non-Google top 5 list personally. I just think
that people are cautious because very few people have experience with
it. No one for sure knows whether it will actually work for our needs.
It therefore pays to be cautious and deliberative.
