[WikiEN-l] Sanger and CZ

[David Still]

Disclaimer: I'm the same David Still that wrote the blog post being
discussed. :)

> We are obviously only hearing one side of the story, but even so it's
> pretty crazy. Hearing from the former CZ editor in the comments
> backing him up helped, of course.

On this note, I strongly suggest that you read through as much of the
thread as is available. The relevant links, in chronological order, go
like this:

1. My original post at Ars Technica, under the username 'stigmata', in
which I make many of the same points. I was responded to by Mike
Johnson of the CZ Executive Committee ('johnsonmx').
http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/174096756/m/691002192831?r=453008192831#453008192831

2. The (criticism-only) blog post that followed:
http://daveydweeb.com/2007/02/03/and-yet-still-so-far-to-go/

3. My suggestions for change, based on the previous two posts, and the
rejection email from Citizendium-L (be sure to read the forum thread I
linked to): http://daveydweeb.com/2007/02/03/and-now-the-suggestions/

4. My announcement that I'd put a proof-of-concept online,
demonstrating one idea for improving the Approval process:
http://daveydweeb.com/2007/02/06/making-approval-not-suck/

5. My bitter response to Larry's rejection of the above idea:
http://daveydweeb.com/2007/02/07/citizendium-isnt-interested-in-your-opinion/

Those five links provide as close to the full story as is publicly
available. I should note that a number of Citizendium contributors
have taken a very agreeable stance toward me, as you'd see at my
Citizendium talk page and the CZ forum thread linked above --
especially Mike Johnson, who's been very moderate and civil throughout
the debate.

I'll try not to argue my point too much, here. I just sensed a need to
point out a little more of the story.

Cheerio,
David