I think Nathan this thread is an attempt to show why Citizendium isn't a resounding success. And the very fact that some contributors, instead of wanting to improve the project, entrench themselves, shows part of the problem.

One thing that Wikipedia has going for it, even if change is glacial, it happens. People pointing out flaws in the system, are listened to, even if grudgingly.

A system caught in a deep-freeze isn't going to be able to change with a society which is changing under it. People today are used to the type of thing that Wikipedia does, *so much so* that it has actually forced Brittanica online, IMDb and others trying to compete to change themselves to more closely match.

That says something. In fact I think I see what's coming next. In my opinion there are weaknesses in the Wikipedia approach, such as being resistent to conflicting articles on the same topic (wanting merging instead of duplication). There are also weaknesses in the Knol approach, because you have no real *authority* helping the casual user decide what Knols are good and which are crap.

I think there is a way to bring these closer together, but it's not the Citizendium way. They have already proven that their approach is a dead-end last decade approach.

I just hope that Google will keep Knol running at least for the next couple of years.

Will Johnson

************** Great deals on Dell’s most popular laptops – Starting at $479 (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1220631252x1201390195/aol?redir=http...)