Gerard Meijssen wrote:
I have read with amusement the arguments why the Wikispecies project may not be a good idea by some of the ToL people. As much as I admire the work that went into the ToL and still goes into the ToL, it is also a project that has proven in the past that it is not open and willing to cooperate outside of its own project. When I asked to consider cooperation to come to a universal wikipedia taxobox, the answer was look at all our previous discussions things have been decided,, no we won't have that all over again.
This is an interesting observation for the general situation. It is quite a typical occurrence as systems mature. As a project grows it develops ways of doing things that work to the satisfaction of the majority, and a if-it-ain't-broke-don't-fix-it mentality sets in. That's both good and bad. It preserves what works, but tends to shut out innovation.
I've encounterred Gerard's innovation in another context where I have been doubtful of its applicability. The problem with innovation is that there are often unforseen implications that can disrupt other practices. Simply telling someone to read the past discussions is evasive. Saying that an issue has been decided, and that the need for further discussions has been obviated is not very wiki.
Ec