Difference between revisions of "Criticism of crowdsourcing"
MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Thursday November 21, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to search (→Founding principles: reformat) |
(→Format: indents) |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
===Message board=== | ===Message board=== | ||
| − | '''Pros''' | + | :'''Pros''' |
| − | :Fluid discussions between members | + | ::Fluid discussions between members |
| − | '''Cons''' | + | :'''Cons''' |
| − | :Derailment of threads | + | ::Derailment of threads |
| − | :Appears amateur | + | ::Appears amateur |
===Wiki=== | ===Wiki=== | ||
| − | '''Pros''' | + | :'''Pros''' |
| − | :Output is inherently more "polished" than a message board | + | ::Output is inherently more "polished" than a message board |
| − | '''Cons''' | + | :'''Cons''' |
| − | :Discussion between parties gets lost in "consensus" of page | + | ::Discussion between parties gets lost in "consensus" of page |
==Name ideas== | ==Name ideas== | ||
Revision as of 18:56, 8 October 2008
Consider that Wikipedia Review is now, according to a number of participants there, suffering from various problems of anonymous management and community composition (an influx of Wikipedia apologists). Now may be an opportune time to establish a new forum for discussion of similar matters as posed by Wikipedia Review, but with various improvements.
Let this page serve as a discussion place for this new possibility.
Founding principles
- The ownership and management of the new forum should all be self-identifying persons with legitimate biographies that map to real-world credentials.
- Topical discussions need not be limited to Wikipedia. We can discuss all matter of social, political, commercial, and academic consequences of any of the following:
- Crowdsourcing
- Free licenses
- Wikis
- Section 230 considerations
- Anonymity on the Internet
- Participants in the discussion may elect to do so from behind a pseudonymous cloak, but they will be advised that their opinions and status as participants shall carry less "merit" than those who self-identify and participate transparently.
Format
Which format would be most suitable for this new forum?
Message board
- Pros
- Fluid discussions between members
- Cons
- Derailment of threads
- Appears amateur
Wiki
- Pros
- Output is inherently more "polished" than a message board
- Cons
- Discussion between parties gets lost in "consensus" of page
Name ideas
What might we call this site?
- Critiques of Crowdsourcing
- Wrongs of the Internet
- Rethinking Free Culture
Reserved domain names
- WikipediaMustDie.com
- GregoryKohs.com
- MimboJimbo.com
- MyWikiBiz.com
