[Foundation-l] 2010-11 Annual Plan Now Posted to FoundationWebsite

[Thomas Dalton]

On 1 July 2010 16:57, David Goodman <dgoodmanny at gmail.com> wrote:
> Citizendium is perhaps most valuable for having
> showed us a path we should not follow--elaborate bureaucracy and
> expert editing--but  in a more positive sense did highlight the need
> for us to improve article quality.

Citizendium's bureaucracy and expert editing weren't the main reason
for its failure. The main reason was that Wikipedia already existed.
For all we know, Citizendium's approach may have been better than ours
(although personally I doubt it), but it wasn't sufficiently better
for people to switch from Wikipedia, which was already very
successful.