[Foundation-l] On Wikinews

[Theo10011]

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 9:03 PM, <me at marcusbuck.org> wrote:

>
> Zitat von Theo10011 <de10011 at gmail.com>:
> > 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.
>
> My main point (although I *did* make it clear), was that volunteer-work is
what this movement is built on. Tell me a single content project that was
built by paid employees? If we abandon our identity, then how would we still
be volunteer-driven and open. I can argue volunteers do inherently better
work than paid staff, because they believe in what they do and are
passionate about it. It is however, just a job for most people who get paid
to do the same. You can not pay someone to care, is what my point was.

You are also making generalization about volunteers, that they might have
only one or two hours to contribute. Even so, there are still thousands of
them, many, many more than how many people can be employed at a time.

My argument was, a) paying/hiring staff to edit a project is against the
general ethos of our movement b) why only pay Wikinews staff to approach
critical mass then? Why not Wikiquote or Wiktionary? or some new project? c)
What happens when the staff finishes it's term? who sustains the project
then? If people didn't care earlier they are likely to not care later and
lastly d) You can not form a community from paid employees, they will leave
and when the position ends, who runs the project?

Regards
Theo