[WikiEN-l] Subscription idea

[Thomas Larsen]

Hi Ray,

> Thomas's position smacks of traditional elitism: Why inform the public
> when the public can't understand what you say? You can't expect informed
> consent for medical procedures if the public doesn't understand what the
> doctor is saying, so why say it in the first place?

I think you've misunderstood my position. I'm not elitist, but I'm not
anti-elite, either. That's just reasonable.

A general, uninformed member of the public must understand what the
doctor is saying about their condition. However, they don't have to be
able to understand the technical papers that the doctors read and the
textbooks that they were trained with--presumably, there would be
little need for doctors if this was so. Doctors, thus, are
_experts_--experts who interpret the current body of expert knowledge
about various medical topics and make it clear to the average member
of the public.

Of course, therefore, technical papers don't need, and shouldn't, be
written with uneducated members of the public in mind. They need to be
as accurate as possible, not dampened down--so that experts can
understand them. We want society to move forwards, not be held back by
everybody's lack of/varying expertise.

> It may be extremely difficult to understand technical articles that are
> available; it's absolutely impossible to understand them if they aren't
> available. At one time the dissemination of detailed technical
> information was difficult and necessarily expensive.  Electronic means
> have made these difficulties and expenses trivial.  We can now present
> the information to outlying individuals on the long tail of
> accessibility, without needing to identify who those outlying
> individuals might be.  We can, at no extra cost, make the information
> available to those who have no use for it at all; making it available
> does not impose upon them the obligation of availing themselves.

You have misunderstood my position again. I don't oppose the concept
of the public having free access to journals--in fact, I _very_
strongly support it! I'm a very strong advocate of free content and
free access. I'm simply saying that giving general Wikipedians access
to journals, via a paid subscription funded by the Wikimedia
Foundation, that they will not necessarily understand is nonsensical.
What's needed is advocacy for the entirety of academia to make all of
their journals free content or at least freely accessible--that will
benefit both experts, amateurs, and indeed all the public.

—Thomas Larsen