Steve Bennett wrote:
On 8/7/06, Anthony <wikilegal(a)inbox.org> wrote:
<snip>
Looking at the
rest of the snippet though, I see "Open source
refers to both a model of software development and an ideology of
intellectual property." There again are those two things which I
think are the most striking difference(s) in Wikipedia.
I don't think most Wikipedians are open source fanatics.
No, but Wikipedia has certainly opened us up to such things :) It's a
great example of "open source really can work".
And I don't think Wikipedia being "closed
source" (say there were no
db dumps, contributors retained full copyright over contributions,
and there was no GFDL in play) would radically alter anything.
For the most part, contributors still /do/ retain fully copyright; but
if you made it "one author per article" we'd become E2.
It would reduce the motivation for many contributors,
but it would
not actively interfere with getting the job done.
I disagree on the second point.
--
Alphax -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP