http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article1637535.ece
I spoke to the BBC and the Press Association on the phone. The BBC wanted a telly piece. So I went to the Borders in Oxford Circus, and Borders kindly let the BBC film there. The interview, Rory Callan-Jones, asked me the same question about reliability three or four times until I got it down to a soundbite :-)
They filmed a few walking-around bits in the reference section. Oddly enough, Borders don't sell printed encyclopedias any more. So we decided the Oxford dictionaries would be suitable (I mentioned how the OED used a model like ours starting 150 years ago - volunteer contributions).
This should be on BBC1 six o'clock news this evening. Probably a seven- to ten-second clip of me. That took an hour to make. Maybe I might actually not end up cut this time ;-)
- d.
On 11/04/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article1637535.ece
Larry Sanger says on his blog that this was the media going "let's you and him fight" with an out of context quote:
http://blog.citizendium.org/2007/04/11/broken-beyond-repair-a-bit-out-of-con...
- d.
On 4/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/04/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article1637535.ece
Larry Sanger says on his blog that this was the media going "let's you and him fight" with an out of context quote:
No, you are the person using the words "let's you and him fight". Larry's comments ("have come to the view that it is also broken beyond repair") reflect a destructive and hostile attitude that have characterized his project from the very beginning.
On 11/04/07, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
No, you are the person using the words "let's you and him fight". Larry's comments ("have come to the view that it is also broken beyond repair") reflect a destructive and hostile attitude that have characterized his project from the very beginning.
OTOH, quite a few Wikipedians would agree with the assertion that Wikipedia's governance is broken beyond repair, even if they didn't think much of Larry's solution.
- d.
On 4/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
OTOH, quite a few Wikipedians would agree with the assertion that Wikipedia's governance is broken beyond repair
How so?
On 11/04/07, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 4/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
OTOH, quite a few Wikipedians would agree with the assertion that Wikipedia's governance is broken beyond repair
How so?
Have you been reading wikien-l?
- d.
On 4/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
Have you been reading wikien-l?
How is an open, continuing debate about a variety of issues an indication of "governance broken beyond repair"? Inflammatory comments like this are unhelpful.
Erik Moeller wrote:
On 4/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
Have you been reading wikien-l?
How is an open, continuing debate about a variety of issues an indication of "governance broken beyond repair"? Inflammatory comments like this are unhelpful.
Unhelpful if untrue. I think there's a lot of distaste with the leadership's priorities, approach, and lack of intervention where necessary. I'm sure others would point to other issues.
I know of few people who are happy with the leadership around here, honestly. With no real quantitative way to fix it (Board elections are only part of the equation if the role of the Board isn't redefined), we're kind of stuck.
-Jeff
On 4/11/07, Jeff Raymond jeff.raymond@internationalhouseofbacon.com wrote:
Unhelpful if untrue. I think there's a lot of distaste with the leadership's priorities, approach, and lack of intervention where necessary. I'm sure others would point to other issues.
Leadership? What leadership?
Kelly
Kelly Martin wrote:
On 4/11/07, Jeff Raymond jeff.raymond@internationalhouseofbacon.com wrote:
Unhelpful if untrue. I think there's a lot of distaste with the leadership's priorities, approach, and lack of intervention where necessary. I'm sure others would point to other issues.
Leadership? What leadership?
You make a very valid point.
-Jeff
(back to the original topic...) Very good. The Education Secretary says it's good? In all a positive piece, and Natasha and George seemed amused by their photo on [[BBC Six o' clock News]], but they were also amused at someone smashing a ÂŁ45,000 piano...!
On 11/04/07, Kelly Martin kelly.lynn.martin@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/11/07, Jeff Raymond jeff.raymond@internationalhouseofbacon.com wrote:
Unhelpful if untrue. I think there's a lot of distaste with the leadership's priorities, approach, and lack of intervention where necessary. I'm sure others would point to other issues.
Leadership? What leadership?
Kelly
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
I'm confused - someone saw him edit his own article, warned him appropriately, but left the blatant falsehoods in there...
On 11/04/07, Gary Kirk gary.kirk@gmail.com wrote:
(back to the original topic...) Very good. The Education Secretary says it's good? In all a positive piece, and Natasha and George seemed amused by their photo on [[BBC Six o' clock News]], but they were also amused at someone smashing a ÂŁ45,000 piano...!
On 11/04/07, Kelly Martin kelly.lynn.martin@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/11/07, Jeff Raymond jeff.raymond@internationalhouseofbacon.com
wrote:
Unhelpful if untrue. I think there's a lot of distaste with the leadership's priorities, approach, and lack of intervention where necessary. I'm sure others would point to other issues.
Leadership? What leadership?
Kelly
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-- Gary Kirk
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 11/04/07, Martin Peeks martinp23@googlemail.com wrote:
I'm confused - someone saw him edit his own article, warned him appropriately, but left the blatant falsehoods in there...
When he told me he was going to do that, I looked pained and asked him please not to do that. "It's like deliberately spraying graffiti on a bus stop because you've heard the locals are good at cleaning it up." He looked embarrassed and said he'd clean up after himself ...
- d.
Heh - shame he didn't :-(. I wonder if he'd give us a picture for that article...
On 11/04/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/04/07, Martin Peeks martinp23@googlemail.com wrote:
I'm confused - someone saw him edit his own article, warned him appropriately, but left the blatant falsehoods in there...
When he told me he was going to do that, I looked pained and asked him please not to do that. "It's like deliberately spraying graffiti on a bus stop because you've heard the locals are good at cleaning it up." He looked embarrassed and said he'd clean up after himself ...
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
If you missed it: http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_5260000/newsid_5261200/5261222.stm?b... should work (if you're quick...well, before tomorrow's Six o'clock News I assume.
Probably only works in the UK though?
On 11/04/07, Martin Peeks martinp23@googlemail.com wrote:
Heh - shame he didn't :-(. I wonder if he'd give us a picture for that article...
On 11/04/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/04/07, Martin Peeks martinp23@googlemail.com wrote:
I'm confused - someone saw him edit his own article, warned him appropriately, but left the blatant falsehoods in there...
When he told me he was going to do that, I looked pained and asked him please not to do that. "It's like deliberately spraying graffiti on a bus stop because you've heard the locals are good at cleaning it up." He looked embarrassed and said he'd clean up after himself ...
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
By the way, the Wikipedia report starts at 22m:50s
On 11/04/07, Gary Kirk gary.kirk@gmail.com wrote:
If you missed it:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_5260000/newsid_5261200/5261222.stm?b... should work (if you're quick...well, before tomorrow's Six o'clock News I assume.
Probably only works in the UK though?
On 11/04/07, Martin Peeks martinp23@googlemail.com wrote:
Heh - shame he didn't :-(. I wonder if he'd give us a picture for that article...
On 11/04/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/04/07, Martin Peeks martinp23@googlemail.com wrote:
I'm confused - someone saw him edit his own article, warned him appropriately, but left the blatant falsehoods in there...
When he told me he was going to do that, I looked pained and asked him please not to do that. "It's like deliberately spraying graffiti on a bus stop because you've heard the locals are good at cleaning it up." He looked embarrassed and said he'd clean up after himself ...
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-- Gary Kirk
On 4/11/07, Gary Kirk gary.kirk@gmail.com wrote:
Probably only works in the UK though?
Works fine in Switzerland, so I guess it works everywhere... (no, this is not bias)
Michael
On 4/12/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
When he told me he was going to do that, I looked pained and asked him please not to do that. "It's like deliberately spraying graffiti on a bus stop because you've heard the locals are good at cleaning it up." He looked embarrassed and said he'd clean up after himself ...
Oh, nice analogy!
Steve
on 4/11/07 12:28 PM, Erik Moeller at erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
How is an open, continuing debate about a variety of issues an indication of "governance broken beyond repair"? Inflammatory comments like this are unhelpful.
I don't believe it's beyond repair, but can you honestly say that among these "variety of issues" there has not been some serious concerns about the state of leadership in WP?
And as far as "inflammatory remarks" not being helpful: sometimes it takes a flame to generate the heat to produce the power to get something moving. I believe there is also some kind of saying involving standing the heat and something about kitchens ;-)
Marc Riddell
On 4/11/07, Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.net wrote:
on 4/11/07 12:28 PM, Erik Moeller at erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
How is an open, continuing debate about a variety of issues an indication of "governance broken beyond repair"? Inflammatory comments like this are unhelpful.
I don't believe it's beyond repair, but can you honestly say that among these "variety of issues" there has not been some serious concerns about the state of leadership in WP?
There are also legitimate disagreements about the equivalents of "fundamental pillars"; Larry clearly believes that anonymity and levelling the expert/non expert playing field are bad for any project, and took the cause and effects of the Essjay incident as an example of some of that.
From the viewpoint that having people fake credentials is bad, anyone
looking at Wikipedia as-is has to conclude that we're pretty close to fundamentally and structurally broken.
I don't think he's right; he has a point, but experience has shown that the thousands of monkeys we do have are creating some pretty good Shakespeare. That said, Larry's putting his energy where his mouth is, and trying a restart of the WP concept remolded along the lines he thinks fix the things he thinks are broken with WP, at no small investment of his own effort. He clearly isn't "over" his personal issues with Wikipedia, but he's also moving past it.
I think I can see where Erik is coming from in taking this as a percieved attack; I just think it's easier for us not to do that.
George Herbert wrote:
On 4/11/07, Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.net wrote:
on 4/11/07 12:28 PM, Erik Moeller at wrote:
How is an open, continuing debate about a variety of issues an indication of "governance broken beyond repair"? Inflammatory comments like this are unhelpful.
I don't believe it's beyond repair, but can you honestly say that among these "variety of issues" there has not been some serious concerns about the state of leadership in WP?
There are also legitimate disagreements about the equivalents of "fundamental pillars"; Larry clearly believes that anonymity and levelling the expert/non expert playing field are bad for any project, and took the cause and effects of the Essjay incident as an example of some of that.
From the viewpoint that having people fake credentials is bad, anyone
looking at Wikipedia as-is has to conclude that we're pretty close to fundamentally and structurally broken.
Whatever might be said about the honesty of Essjay's self-representation, not much has been said to challenge the scholastic validity of his information.
Ec
From: Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Times article,and BBC and Press Association followups Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 20:17:47 -0700
George Herbert wrote:
On 4/11/07, Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.net wrote:
on 4/11/07 12:28 PM, Erik Moeller at wrote:
How is an open, continuing debate about a variety of issues an indication of "governance broken beyond repair"? Inflammatory comments like this are unhelpful.
I don't believe it's beyond repair, but can you honestly say that among these "variety of issues" there has not been some serious concerns about
the
state of leadership in WP?
There are also legitimate disagreements about the equivalents of "fundamental pillars"; Larry clearly believes that anonymity and levelling the expert/non expert playing field are bad for any project, and took the cause and effects of the Essjay incident as an example of some of that.
From the viewpoint that having people fake credentials is bad, anyone
looking at Wikipedia as-is has to conclude that we're pretty close to fundamentally and structurally broken.
Whatever might be said about the honesty of Essjay's self-representation, not much has been said to challenge the scholastic validity of his information.
Ec
Not really fair, several people exhaustively combed through Essjay's content contributions, checking for dubious material. He only made 300 of them, anyway.
Moreschi
_________________________________________________________________ Get Hotmail, News, Sport and Entertainment from MSN on your mobile. http://www.msn.txt4content.com/
Christiano Moreschi wrote:
From: Ray Saintonge wrote
George Herbert wrote:
There are also legitimate disagreements about the equivalents of
"fundamental pillars"; Larry clearly believes that anonymity and levelling the expert/non expert playing field are bad for any project, and took the cause and effects of the Essjay incident as an example of some of that.
From the viewpoint that having people fake credentials is bad, anyone
looking at Wikipedia as-is has to conclude that we're pretty close to fundamentally and structurally broken.
Whatever might be said about the honesty of Essjay's self-representation, not much has been said to challenge the scholastic validity of his information.
Not really fair, several people exhaustively combed through Essjay's content contributions, checking for dubious material. He only made 300 of them, anyway.
What does fairness have to do with it. Your comment essentially substantiate what I said about Essjay. If Larry wants to draw unwarranted inferences from what he sees happening on Wikipedia there is nothing unfair about pointing that out.
Ec
On 4/11/07, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 4/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
Have you been reading wikien-l?
How is an open, continuing debate about a variety of issues an indication of "governance broken beyond repair"? Inflammatory comments like this are unhelpful.
I think there is largely a consensus about everything you say, except the applicability of the words "open, continuing debate".
For what it is worth (IMO not much), there is a non-neglible minority who feel that their views are being quashed, or atleast their influence in matters is not quite as great as they have an aspiration to.
Even if trivial, such views do bespeak of a certain malaise. Not necessarily of a malaise that is avoidable, but voluntarily pulling scales *over* our eyes is not useful. Disregarding the yammerers is healthy, but claiming they do not exist is something I would never do. That egyptian river is awfully long. -- ~~~~
-- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]
Well, I did find that the Times was taking the phrase 'While Wikipedia is still quite useful and an amazing phenomenon, I have come to the view that it is also broken beyond repair.' - which is a direct quotation from LMS, and coming to the following stronger conclusion:
'But Larry Sanger, who helped to found Wikipedia in 2001, said that the site was "broken beyond repair" and no longer reliable.' - in which only "broken beyond repair" was from LMS, the 'no longer reliable' bit being an interpolation from the words "still quite useful" and "I have come to the view".
However, the phrase 'no longer reliable' used by the Times itself, is given first, and the full context only later, making it possible for the casual reader to presume that LMS had intimated that there was some some mythical past when wikipedia *was* reliable, but has lately fallen from that grace, which is not a conclusion supportable from the context.
So, quite separate from whatever animus LMS might or might not have towards WP, The Times definitely was trying to milk the controversy.
On 4/11/07, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 4/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/04/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article1637535.ece
Larry Sanger says on his blog that this was the media going "let's you and him fight" with an out of context quote:
No, you are the person using the words "let's you and him fight". Larry's comments ("have come to the view that it is also broken beyond repair") reflect a destructive and hostile attitude that have characterized his project from the very beginning.
-- Peace & Love, Erik
DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
"An old, rigid civilization is reluctantly dying. Something new, open, free and exciting is waking up." -- Ming the Mechanic
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l