On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:17 PM, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote:
> An objectivist in a liberal blog? It happens. > > > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jimmy-wales/what-the-msm-gets-wrong-a_b_292809.html > > (It's a piece about our remarkably accuracy-deficient coverage in the > media in the last month or so. What happens when there's nothing to > write about and people like me end up on telly.) > > > - d. > > Wasn't the order of operations here like so: * BLP issues. Anyone can say anything about anyone alive on one of the most popular websites in the world and it gets published. * Foundation pays tens of thousands of dollars to develop a technology that allows edits to be reviewed before being posted * Some negative press and complaints, but not that much since it hasn't been widely publicized. * Community discussion starts on en.wp with lots of involvement by JW * More and more press, people start noticing that it's actually quite a big shift from the original encyclopedia that anyone could edit *in realtime* * Further community discussion with lots of critics and negative press. It becomes necessary to "spin" the conversation in the direction of not only increased responsibility, but also increased openness. * Conversation eventually turns mostly towards convincing people that this actually makes wikimedia more open, while also making it more responsible. It's hard to follow everything that goes on here, but I distinctly remember when FlaggedRevisions was developed, and per my recollection openness was not one of the original arguments that caused the foundation to contract its development. If anyone knows more than me and cares to clear up my misconceptions, that'd be great. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l