[WikiEN-l] Ayn Rand and Wikipedia

[Anthony]

On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 12:19 PM, <WJhonson at aol.com> wrote:

>  In a message dated 5/8/2008 5:47:17 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
> anirudhsbh at gmail.com writes:
>
>
> *To say that "Ayn gave the impression that a work created by committee
> would
> never achieve any degree of excellence" is simply untrue.  It was her
> belief
> that when man was driven by rational self-interest towards achieving his
> end.  For that purpose, he could function within a committee or an
> organization as efficiently as an individual would have.  One of the
> features of strong capitalist societies are the huge multinational and
> transnational corporations, which are more effective and efficient in their
> zeal to achieve excellence driven by free competition in free markets.>>
>
> --------------------
> But that isn't a counter argument.  The reason is because, even in that
> multi-national corporation, if *you* are allowed to do your own work,
> without undue influence (micro-managing) then you can still produce
> excellence.  However, if your work is developed by committee, where your
> best ideas are watered down and changed to the point where they don't
> resemble what you had in mind whatsoever, that is the thing that Ayn was
> against.
>
> I have worked for companies where I was allowed to create excellent
> computer programs that were really years ahead of our competitors.  And I've
> worked for companies where I was not.  In order for me to achieve
> excellence, I require the looser management style that Ayn would probably
> approve.
>

The more I learn about Objectivism, the more I think that it is a ridiculous
question to even be asking if Rand would approve of Wikipedia.  John Galt
might as well have been talking about Wikipedia (especially in light of its
recent plans to relicense the work of its contributors to eliminate those
pesky attribution requirements) when he said: "In order to deprive us of
honor that you may then deprive us our wealth, you have always regarded us
as slaves who deserve no moral recognition. You praise any venture that
claims to be non-profit, and damn the men who made the profits that make the
venture possible. You regard as in the public interest any projects serving
those who do not pay. It is not in the public interest to provide any
services to those who do the paying."

Jimbo may not have intended for the Wikimedia Foundation to be overtaken by
altruists, but it certainly has.