[Foundation-l] Knol, a year later

[Fred Bauder]

> 2009/8/10 Mike Godwin <mnemonic at gmail.com>:
>
>> But to me the takeaway from this error of Knol's licensing design is
>> not
>> that Knol can't work -- it's that it actually could work, if properly
>> thought through. Â So my view right now is the Wikimedia community
>> can't be
>> complacent about Knol's apparent failure -- properly adjusted and
>> redesigned, it could have quite an impact on us. Â We're going to have
>> to
>> continue to give serious attention to all the issues, from quality to
>> community to legality, that give us an advantage in terms of fueling
>> creative collaboration, as we go forward.
>> The next Knol can't be relied upon to make the same mistakes.
>
>
> Whuh?
>
> Educational free content production is not competition with us. It's
> success for us.
>
> Knol, as first put forward, looked like about.com - factual signed
> articles. If it had worked, that would have been fantastic as a
> reference source.
>
> In what way would a successful version of Knol actually be a problem
> for us? If ten other websites fulfill WMF's mission without WMF having
> to pay the hosting bills, how is that a problem for us? I really don't
> see it.
>
>
> - d.

Didn't you ever play Monopoly?

Fred