Christiano Moreschi wrote:
That's because, Marc, 1s and 0s matter more to Wikipedia than people do. Some scandal splits the community? Half of everyone leaves in despair? Doesn't matter, we can just draft in new populations - probably of higher quality than the current population, too.
If you think that these new people will magically be of higher quality, you are probably caught in a daydream. Each brings his own baggage about what an encyclopedia should be, and none of the experience about how we got here.
Besides, I doubt whether there really was a time when the community ever did march unitedly behind the banner of one set of "ideals". It's obvious that, even from the start, our founders had different visions of what Wikipedia was - and what Wikipedia should become. No point harking back to an imaginary Golden Age.
Wikipedia grew well beyond the vision of the founders. Most great ideas never come close to their founders' visions, if they get off the ground at all. It would be great to hear Jimbo reflect on how big he expected the project to get at the time it was started.
Ec