[Wikimedia-l] Progress...

[Fred Bauder]

> Hoi,
>
> Sorry Fred, I do not like your post. The quote has it wrong because
> research shows that it is factually wrong. Wikipedia has a better
> coverage
> at a superior quality to the encyclopaedia that went before. The only
> thing
> I can agree with is that it is available at a much lower cost; it is the
> cost of having access to the Internet.
>
> As a consequence why should I read it ?
> Thanks,
>        GerardM

If systemic biased editing is not considered your statement would be
true. However, one of the side effects of our volunteeristic methods is
that systemic bias resulting from editing by groups and interests with
numberless agendas is inevitable; not that Britannica was without certain
systemic biases. Wikipedia does not have good editorial control and can
never have it. Gresham's law is at work; no printed book has the beauty
and quality of the Lindisfarne Gospels; nothing made on a machine loom
compares remotely with Navajo weaving.

Fred

>
>
> On 26 July 2013 13:48, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at fairpoint.net> wrote:
>
>> "As with other inventions that produced an inferior product at a much
>> lower price, from the printing press to the steam-driven loom to
>> Wikipedia, what happens now is largely in the hands of the people
>> experimenting with the new tools, rather than defending themselves from
>> them."
>>
>>
>> http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2013/07/08/moocs-and-economic-reality/
>>
>> Fred
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request at lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>