Look, you say that it can't be seen as an experiment because there arn't any start and end dates, and so forth, but does not mean it isn't an experience. You are right, it very well MAY be a permanent policy change if it works out fine... if it doesn't (many people complain, it doesn't really reduce bad entries, wikipedia growth is severely stuntet, etc) we will just change it back. We could sit around and discuss if this is a good idea forever, but the only way we will ever know for sure is to actually try it out.
Look, this in no way (except in the very most theoretical wiki-fundamental way) limits the openness of wikipedia, and it very well might increase the overall quality, so why not try it for awhile?
Remember, we are here to write an encyclopedia first and foremost. We are a grand social experment ofcourse, but not primarily (or however that qoute went).
On 12/6/05, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/6/05, Martin Osterman stonewallgrant@gmail.com wrote:
First of all, I don't think that Jimbo ever expected that Wikipedia would become this popular and widespread. The quote you use was made FOUR YEARS ago. A lot has changed in four years' time.
I know. But human nature hasn't changed much in that time.
And both Jimbo and I expected Wikipedia would become this popular and widespread.
Now, I don't profess to know why we were the last to find out... that could be for any number of reasons. However, I think that this experiment is going to yield interesting results, and for that reason I endorse it. (Not as if anything needs my endorsing since I'm just one editor among hundreds)
What annoys me particularly is pretending that this is an experiment. It's not. It's a permanent policy change.
Who's willing to bet that I'm wrong? _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l