Zitat von Theo10011 <de10011(a)gmail.com>om>:
I don't quiet agree with that analysis. You
comparison with professional
competitors might have held true in the last age of publishing, the playing
field has been much more leveled. Even the New York Times has a hard time
being competitive in this age, when they can't compete with individual
bloggers posting and copying stories from everywhere. Amateurs already won
that race.
My main point was (although I didn't make it overly clear) not that
"professionals" do inherently better work than amateurs/volunteers,
but that they constantly dedicate eight working hours every day to
creating content. That's something you can count on to provide the
base load of the critical mass. Most volunteers on the other hand can
only dedicate one or two hours a day and only if they have no other
obligations. Sometimes volunteers stop contributing for no apparent
reason. You cannot create large articles, background pieces or
interviews in just one or two hours. That's why professionals are
useful.
Marcus Buck
User:Slomox