[Foundation-l] Social networking (was: Analysis of lists statistics: community in decline)

[Milos Rancic]

On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 6:54 PM, John Vandenberg <jayvdb at gmail.com> wrote:
> "Social networking" invokes a much lower bar, as freedom of expression
> is expected, and so any "content" that doesnt break the law is usually
> permissible.  We have avoided these issues by having very high code of
> user conduct, and a large part of that is due to contributors being
> expected to not indulge in personal expression if that doesnt fit
> within the project scope.

This would be, of course, at the separate place, as an extension of
user profiles. So, this wouldn't contaminate articles.

> The APIs are already open; arnt they?
>
> If someone built a beta of a cool app that Wikipedians would use often
> as part of their reading/contributing activities, I doubt WMF would
> actively prevent it from pulling down the content it needs.
>
> Facebook apps are already possible.

So, we are making business to Facebook. The point is to keep users at
our site, not at some other site.

> It is very strange that you would think of "Wikipedia" as the host of
> those things.  The "Wikisource" and "Author" namespaces of Wikisource
> are devoted to bibliographies, and Wikiversity is intended to host
> personal and collaborative scientific work (OR).

Wikipedia is the most useful place all over Wikimedia projects; at
least for the majority of users. So, this was the starting point...
But, of course, such application would be able and should include
organization of work all over Wikimedia projects (as well as
organization of *personal* references; not bibliographies of
scientists).

> We do need a continual stream of new contributors, but it is incorrect
> to assume that we need more or less in order to be successful.  WMF is
> already successful, and if the projects continue at the current rate,
> they will be continue to be successful.  I dont think we should panic
> if/when the bigger projects slow down and contributions start to
> decline.  A good percentage of those people are probably moving to
> other projects or languages.

Continual stream of new contributors is decreasing and number of
active and very active contributors is decreasing, too -- all over the
Wikimedia projects (with very small number of exceptions). (This is, i
think fourth or fifth time in the last couple of days that I am
repeating it; I became boring to myself.)