Difference between revisions of "Criticism of crowdsourcing"
MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Thursday November 21, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to searchJon Awbrey (talk | contribs) (→Founding principles: sub [cachet, etc./merit]) |
(→Founding principles: "authenticity" is really the word I'm looking for.) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
==Founding principles== | ==Founding principles== | ||
| − | # The ownership and management of the new forum should all be self-identifying persons with legitimate biographies that map to real-world | + | # The ownership and management of the new forum should all be self-identifying persons with legitimate biographies that map to real-world authenticity. |
# 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: | # 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 | #* Crowdsourcing | ||
Revision as of 01:24, 9 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 authenticity.
- 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 "cachet" (clout, gravitas, etc.) 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?
- Criticism of Crowdsourcing
- Wrongs of the Internet
- Rethinking Free Culture
Reserved domain names
- WikipediaMustDie.com
- GregoryKohs.com
- MimboJimbo.com
- MyWikiBiz.com
