How do you have a "mob" and then say "it's nice" ? By the way Ayn didn't necessarily believe that a "committe" was nice. A mob can be a committee as well. The underlying point is that only individuals can create true works of beauty. That to her mind, a collective can never create a work of beauty. They can however, evidently, create a "society" *in which* artists are free to express their works. But it's not the specific works that she would like created collectively, only the environment in which those works could be created by invidivuals.
That's my viewpoint of her viewpoint.
In a message dated 9/22/2008 10:34:02 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, elipongo@gmail.com writes:
The article space is most certainly not controlled by committee; the real estate of what's visible to the public in the articles is subject to constant struggle and competition amongst the editors to get what they think should be up there. We form and disband coalitions and constantly adapt our tactics to the environment of our competitors. Thankfully this competition is usually undertaken with rational debate (though I think we've all seen the occasional lynching, it's all part of being a mob).
**************Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and calculators. (http://www.walletpop.com/?NCID=emlcntuswall00000001)
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 1:38 AM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
How do you have a "mob" and then say "it's nice" ?
Sorry, I didn't mean to be unclear. The sense of the word I mean is an unorganized crowd of people, which is how I perceive the creation of content on Wikipedia to be taking place. I realize that may be an archaic usage, but I suppose that's what happens when a guy reads too many old books (currently working on Jerome K. Jerome's "Three Men in a Boat", been meaning to get to it since I was a kid and I read about it in Heinlein's "Have Space Suit—Will Travel")
Anyway, sorry for the misunderstanding.
2008/9/23 WJhonson@aol.com:
By the way Ayn didn't necessarily believe that a "committe" was nice. A mob can be a committee as well. The underlying point is that only individuals can create true works of beauty. That to her mind, a collective can never create a work of beauty. They can however, evidently, create a "society" *in which* artists are free to express their works. But it's not the specific works that she would like created collectively, only the environment in which those works could be created by invidivuals. That's my viewpoint of her viewpoint.
I think you'd be hard pressed to call any Wikipedia article a true work of beauty (and I include FAs and GAs in that).
However, the pile of articles forms a work of great *utility* to the casual reader, as demonstrated by getting an #8 Alexa rating while never having tried to (and our ridiculous popularity costs us a small fortune to serve). We're clearly doing something right, even if working out what brings to mind parables about blind men and elephants.
- d.
2008/9/23 David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com:
I think you'd be hard pressed to call any Wikipedia article a true work of beauty (and I include FAs and GAs in that).
Not that hard to argue when you consider some of the graphics that go with them.
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 1:38 AM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
The underlying point is that only individuals can create true works of beauty. That to her mind, a collective can never create a work of beauty.
"In any collaboration between two men (or two groups) who hold different basic principles, it is the more evil or irrational one who wins."- Ayn Rand
Seems rather damning of the Wikipedia process, where good and rational people are expected to work hand in hand collaborating with evil and irrational ones.
Anthony
2008/9/23 Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
Seems rather damning of the Wikipedia process, where good and rational people are expected to work hand in hand collaborating with evil and irrational ones.
The common case is not evil and irrational ones, but good and irrational ones, who are much worse. "Assume good faith" is a nicer restatement of "never assume malice when stupidity will suffice." Or "I prefer rogues to imbeciles, because rogues sometimes rest" (Alexandre Dumas fils).
- d.
2008/9/23 Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 1:38 AM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
The underlying point is that only individuals can create true works of beauty. That to her mind, a collective can never create a work of beauty.
"In any collaboration between two men (or two groups) who hold different basic principles, it is the more evil or irrational one who wins."- Ayn Rand
Seems rather damning of the Wikipedia process, where good and rational people are expected to work hand in hand collaborating with evil and irrational ones.
Anthony
Only if you accept Ayn Rand's rather deluded view of evil.
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 9:56 AM, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
2008/9/23 Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 1:38 AM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
The underlying point is that only individuals can create true works of beauty. That to her mind, a collective can
never
create a work of beauty.
"In any collaboration between two men (or two groups) who hold different basic principles, it is the more evil or irrational one who wins."- Ayn
Rand
Seems rather damning of the Wikipedia process, where good and rational people are expected to work hand in hand collaborating with evil and irrational ones.
Only if you accept Ayn Rand's rather deluded view of evil.
Even with Ayn Rand's (certainly unconventional) definition of evil, it's still a bold statement, and, if true, it still would be rather damning of the Wikipedia process.
On the other hand, I don't know if I believe it to be true or not. And taken narrowly, it only covers a situation consisting of two people. Wikipedia POV fights tend to involve more than two people, which gives the majority faction a natural advantage.
But it is, in my opinion, one thing Knol has going for it. If only they could fix the bugs, and figure out a decent system for internal linking.
How good was Wikipedia when it was the same age as Knol?