On Oct 27, 2012, at 6:33 PM, Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis wrote:
articles are a perennial proposal. They have in fact been
implemented on other wikis, such as WikInfo. However, it seems in
practice that readers want one place to go, not several.
I think we can avoid the arrows impossibility theorem by not striving for
consensus at all.
That's categorically incorrect. Consensus is a rational preference, you would ban it,
there for violating admissibility. It will also run into transitivity issues quickly, as
people will set up link farms to point to their version.
Consensus is core to what credibility wikipedia has, because it is much harder to get a
bot net to generate it than to generate links. It means that anyone who writes has at
least consented to have others check their work.
I know that this is very different from what wikipedia has been known to be
and it is understandable that this huge change can only happen from outside
This project has been started, it is called "the world wide web."