A commercial enterprise "a bit like a wiki or a blog" that's "a way to crowdsource *high-quality* information".
http://columbus.craigslist.org/eng/3614099241.html
- d.
"co-founder of Wikipedia and many others". Indeed.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 1:51 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
A commercial enterprise "a bit like a wiki or a blog" that's "a way to crowdsource *high-quality* information".
http://columbus.craigslist.org/eng/3614099241.html
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 14 February 2013 14:20, Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 1:51 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
A commercial enterprise "a bit like a wiki or a blog" that's "a way to crowdsource *high-quality* information". http://columbus.craigslist.org/eng/3614099241.html
"co-founder of Wikipedia and many others". Indeed.
Yes, his track record of success is singular.
- d.
That job ad is so awesome I had to save it for posterity. Work as a programmer slash executive assistant, for free! Be available 24 hours a day at a moments notice! Weekends off? Forget it! Mediocre candidates need not apply! Work for the *gasp* co-founder of Wikipedia! Solid, solid gold.
On 14 February 2013 15:15, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
That job ad is so awesome I had to save it for posterity. Work as a programmer slash executive assistant, for free! Be available 24 hours a day at a moments notice! Weekends off? Forget it! Mediocre candidates need not apply! Work for the *gasp* co-founder of Wikipedia! Solid, solid gold.
I think you're being unduly harsh here. His track record speaks for itself.
- d.
On 14 February 2013 15:15, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
That job ad is so awesome I had to save it for posterity. Work as a programmer slash executive assistant, for free! Be available 24 hours a day at a moments notice! Weekends off? Forget it! Mediocre candidates need not apply! Work for the *gasp* co-founder of Wikipedia! Solid, solid gold.
I think you're being unduly harsh here. His track record speaks for itself.
- d.
He's not wrong; if it is possible to effectively mobilize the world's best experts in a major widely supported crowd sourcing project it could be awesome. Any Wikipedia editor knows from experience that from time to time you end up arguing with idiots and losing the argument by consensus.
Fred
On 14 February 2013 15:49, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
He's not wrong; if it is possible to effectively mobilize the world's best experts in a major widely supported crowd sourcing project it could be awesome. Any Wikipedia editor knows from experience that from time to time you end up arguing with idiots and losing the argument by consensus.
The trouble is that Larry will be running it. The arc of Citizendium, from launch sideways into the ground, was marked by Larry recruiting lots of high-powered academics then driving them away within a few months. (At which point the pseudoscientists and cranks moved in, and a bit after that the featured article was a puff piece on homeopathy.) He is demonstrably really, really terrible at community management.
- d.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 5:39 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 14 February 2013 15:15, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
That job ad is so awesome I had to save it for posterity. Work as a programmer slash executive assistant, for free! Be available 24 hours a day at a moments notice! Weekends off? Forget it! Mediocre candidates need not apply! Work for the *gasp* co-founder of Wikipedia! Solid, solid gold.
I think you're being unduly harsh here. His track record speaks for itself.
- d.
Sounds like he want's to build a megaproject in a huge go, no evolutionary steps at all, and then see if anyone likes the behemoth of a constructed reality straight-jacket.
On 21 February 2013 11:34, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonavaro@gmail.com wrote:
Sounds like he want's to build a megaproject in a huge go, no evolutionary steps at all, and then see if anyone likes the behemoth of a constructed reality straight-jacket.
Well, it worked for Citizendium. (Completely planned out about a year in advance, from the Slashdot editorial.)
- d.
The plan for Citizendium worked? First time that's ever been asserted. It worked in the sense a plan was developed, but the plan was indeed a "behemoth" and a "straight-jacket", and was a key reason why the project was so unsuccessful. Among the many things the plan failed to consider, which would have been fore-front in any plan evolved by a community, was the need to make sure the people named as the editors actually were authorities in their subject. I was there from the start of the project: I was one of the first "expert" editors, I was one of the members of the first editorial board, The basic idea was wonderful as a supplement to WP, but its failure has made it almost impossible to try properly for a version of WP with expert peer-review of the content.
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 7:14 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 21 February 2013 11:34, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonavaro@gmail.com wrote:
Sounds like he want's to build a megaproject in a huge go, no evolutionary steps at all, and then see if anyone likes the behemoth of a constructed reality straight-jacket.
Well, it worked for Citizendium. (Completely planned out about a year in advance, from the Slashdot editorial.)
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 21 February 2013 18:08, David Goodman dggenwp@gmail.com wrote:
The plan for Citizendium worked? First time that's ever been asserted.
I think David may have been being sarcastic...
More a failure of nerve; when he did not attract experts in the field he gave authority to 2nd rate people. Present company excepted, of course.
Fred
The plan for Citizendium worked? First time that's ever been asserted. It worked in the sense a plan was developed, but the plan was indeed a "behemoth" and a "straight-jacket", and was a key reason why the project was so unsuccessful. Among the many things the plan failed to consider, which would have been fore-front in any plan evolved by a community, was the need to make sure the people named as the editors actually were authorities in their subject. I was there from the start of the project: I was one of the first "expert" editors, I was one of the members of the first editorial board, The basic idea was wonderful as a supplement to WP, but its failure has made it almost impossible to try properly for a version of WP with expert peer-review of the content.
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 7:14 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 21 February 2013 11:34, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonavaro@gmail.com wrote:
Sounds like he want's to build a megaproject in a huge go, no evolutionary steps at all, and then see if anyone likes the behemoth of a constructed reality straight-jacket.
Well, it worked for Citizendium. (Completely planned out about a year in advance, from the Slashdot editorial.)
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-- David Goodman
DGG at the enWP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 21 February 2013 19:00, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
More a failure of nerve; when he did not attract experts in the field he gave authority to 2nd rate people. Present company excepted, of course.
He attracted academics, then he and the constables drove them away. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Citizendium summarises the decline and fall. Some Citizens have claimed it is inaccurate, but failed to respond when asked to detail the inaccuracies; any corrections are of course welcomed.
- d.
On 14 February 2013 15:15, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
That job ad is so awesome I had to save it for posterity. Work as a programmer slash executive assistant, for free! Be available 24 hours a day at a moments notice! Weekends off? Forget it! Mediocre candidates need not apply! Work for the *gasp* co-founder of Wikipedia! Solid, solid gold.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/File:Capture_0e1fc921fd43d5424ccfe36c4554a06308...
(RW has a Capturebot for this sort of thing.)
- d.
It's interesting: his official website links to a Facebook fan page for Sanger... automatically generated, containing his Wikipedia profile.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Larry-Sanger/107978809222387
Nick
"I am rarely as enthusiastic about my ideas as I am about this one--it's a corker."
I've never known him not be extremely enthusiatic about his ideas...
"If you need to see the project before agreeing to work, and I like you, it's no problem for me to share access to the site if you sign the NDA/non-compete."
Is that standard? Signing a non-compete before finding out what the project is sounds risky - you have no idea what you're agreeing not to compete with...
On 14 February 2013 13:51, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
A commercial enterprise "a bit like a wiki or a blog" that's "a way to crowdsource *high-quality* information".
http://columbus.craigslist.org/eng/3614099241.html
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 14 February 2013 13:51, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
A commercial enterprise "a bit like a wiki or a blog" that's "a way to crowdsource *high-quality* information". http://columbus.craigslist.org/eng/3614099241.html
Splash page up now:
- d.
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 12:01 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 14 February 2013 13:51, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
A commercial enterprise "a bit like a wiki or a blog" that's "a way to crowdsource *high-quality* information". http://columbus.craigslist.org/eng/3614099241.html
Splash page up now:
Like most descriptions of projects that give no details as to actual implementation, so you fill in the blanks with your own wildest dreams, it sounds awesome. :)
On 13 March 2013 17:01, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 14 February 2013 13:51, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
A commercial enterprise "a bit like a wiki or a blog" that's "a way to crowdsource *high-quality* information". http://columbus.craigslist.org/eng/3614099241.html
Splash page up now:
"What if we could come together in a huge way and actually produce something of really high quality? Wouldn't that be great?"
Yes, it is great...
The problem he apparently trying to solve is that sites like Wikipedia and YouTube are "kind of noisy". As problem statements go, it lacks a certain specificity...
The problem he apparently trying to solve is that sites like Wikipedia and YouTube are "kind of noisy". As problem statements go, it lacks a certain specificity...
I know what he means though. The snarling nonsense we sometimes encounter on mailing lists or during editing disputes could fairly be characterized as "noise". The question is whether this project will be any better.
Fred
On 13 March 2013 18:15, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
The problem he apparently trying to solve is that sites like Wikipedia and YouTube are "kind of noisy". As problem statements go, it lacks a certain specificity...
I know what he means though. The snarling nonsense we sometimes encounter on mailing lists or during editing disputes could fairly be characterized as "noise". The question is whether this project will be any better.
I don't think that is what he means. I think he's talking from the perspective of content users, not content generators.
On 13 March 2013 18:15, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
The problem he apparently trying to solve is that sites like Wikipedia and YouTube are "kind of noisy". As problem statements go, it lacks a certain specificity...
I know what he means though. The snarling nonsense we sometimes encounter on mailing lists or during editing disputes could fairly be characterized as "noise". The question is whether this project will be any better.
For the editor, or for the reader, one does ask.
Charles