On 11/01/11 5:18 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote:
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 11:56:48 +0000,
Fae<fae(a)wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
Efficiency has never been a part of Wikipedia's mission
That's a slightly
odd interpretation,
<http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mission_statement> specifically
includes effective dissemination of content. Though the word
"effective" is quite different in meaning to "efficient", it would
be
hard to imagine operational processes or practices being judged as an
effective use of donated funds if at the same time they blatantly
failed to be efficient.
I may be missing the point, perhaps someone can provide a practical
counter-example?
Since it all started from my message, by "efficiency" I
meant "efficient
creation of knowledge" which in my opinion can sometimes arise from
interaction between the editors (when this collaboration is constructive)
and sometimes may be deterred by the interaction when this interaction is
destructive. I do not see any indication to the fact that Wikilove always
enables constructive interaction (just today I came across a nice example
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jcb&oldid=5981…
- though I have no idea of the background of this message). I personally
will opt-out of Wikilove at the receiving side as soon as the option is
available. I am also not sure that the family-like model always enables
constructive interactions, since some users prefer to treat some others as
family members, and more others as aliens or enemies.
I can at least agree that I interpreted your use of the word
"efficiency" in your sense of the efficient creation of knowledge"
instead of Fae's efficient use of donated funds. Not that I want to go
too deeply into the semantics, but "efficient" describes a process while
"effective" describes a result.
Ray