"more people keeping the idiots at bay" (was Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia slated in the Sunday Times)

[Jesse W]

On Feb 12, 2006, at 12:00 AM, Jon wrote:
>   Mind you, when WP has more people keeping the idiots at bay rather 
> than writing content (as most likely is the case now), something has 
> gone wrong.
My first thought was, No, wait - it means something has gone *right* , 
we have so much already covered that the balance shifts to defending 
what we have, rather than adding more.  But then I thought, yeah, in 
that case, why are we keeping it in a wiki format?  If it's actually 
stable, then put it in straight HTML, mirror it everywhere (oh wait, we 
already do that), and shake hands on a job well done... ;-)

In any case, what evidence do you have that suggests this?  What comes 
to mind could be: percentage of RC edits that are reversions, rather 
than additions - this is invalid because people may add content in 
large pieces, not in lots of edits.  Any other measurements people can 
think of?

Just wanted to bring this up,
	Jesse Weinstein