>
> It's dumbing down, but that too derives from the premise that everything
> has an origin. Computer geeks tend to be fanatically logical, and that
> does not leave much room for alternative explanations or sources. In
> many subjects we can fill in the blanks later when someone has the time
> to spend tracing things, but that approach is not shared with those who
> believe in the immediacy of a deletion debate.
>
> Ec
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
Great thought.
The advantage of the wiki model, and {{sofixit}}, is that it doesn't matter
the profession.
I'm not a computer geek, I'm an encyclopedia geek. While my personal work
doesn't involve my degree, I did major in history, which leads to this:
<http://chnm.gmu.edu/essays-on-history-new-media/essays/?essayid=42>
So what we have is an amalgamation of left brain and right brain thinkers
working together while building Wikimedia projects, which gets back to my
idea of instruction creep interferes with the process of building. It's not
an architectural project, we don't have blueprints. Thinking that we do
will discourage the "experts/smart people" from contributing. Well, it has
as well as will. There's no mitigating factor other than accepting that
users will "get" the model of having no deadline and consensus building and
work within it, or choose not to no matter the talent or skill/knowledge
level.
~Keegan
--
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
