[WikiEN-l] Citizendium

[gwern branwen]

On 9/16/06, Kim van der Linde <kim at kimvdlinde.com> wrote:
> As an expert who has left Wikipedia more or less, I can give you an answer:
> 1. I would write there for Citizendium, not for Wikipedia.

And judging from the current success of Sanger's past endeavours (I'm
thinking of Digital Universe here), you would be wasting your time.
Remember, "the good is the enemy of the best", or better yet, "worse
is better".

> 2. Content from there included in Wikipedia will deteriorate at
> Wikipedia over time, there is will remain sound.

'Soundness' can be read as 'static', and the value of staticness can
be overrated. Cyclopaedia is static, yet not useful.

> 3. Content there, if the right editing paradigm is chosen, will continue
> to improve, which would either require Wikipedia to repeatedly insert
> the newest version, of basically fall behind.

If anything, the flow would be the other way. By definition, Sanger's
various projects must  expect to draw upon a smaller stock of possible
editors. Without even considering first mover, network, or
winner-take-all effects, we should expect Citizenpedia to be borrowing
content from Wikipedia, not the other way around.

.........
> Kim

--Gwern