Guettarda wrote:
On Dec 18, 2007 8:30 PM, <joshua.zelinsky> wrote:
Well Citizendium for reasons I don't fully understand decided to delete all of their from-Wikipedia content that hadn't been already highly modified. So they seem to be determined to succeed without the free re-use which seems to me at least to be needlessly shooting oneself in the foot. I want my content to be reused. I'd likely not contribute if it had to be under a more restrictive license. But yes, if the best we do is to make a roadmap for someone to do even better than we have done we should be happy.
I suspect that goes back to the idea of needing to create a distinct "brand" presence. If Citizendium just has improved versions of Wikipedia articles, it also inherits Wikipedia's reputation for unreliability, and makes it harder for them to develop their own brand identity.
Imagine Conservapedia importing 100,000 Wikipedia articles and making only basic fixes (like changing all BE spelling to AE and inserting the word "theory of" wherever "evolution" and "big bang" occur. No one would go over there for laughs any more, because it would be too hard to find the genuine kool aid.
You seem to have the very essence of it :) To fill out the details see: