On 06/30/2011 07:35 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> Further to your idea: people developing little specialist wikis along
> these lines, and said wikis being mergeable. This makes such wikis
> easier to start, without having to start yet another wiki-based
> general encyclopedia that directly competes wi
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 11:37 PM, Gerard Meijssen
wrote:
> As we did not know the extend to which we generally edit in many languages,
> we have not considered the needs of this majority. Our view has always been
> on single projects. We can do better and we should do better for our
> majority.
>
It looks like we understand the potential risks of adding social
features, but I don't know that the merits have sunk in.
==Don't call it a Social Network, don't think of it as a revolution==
Th first thing to do is banish the word "Social Network" from the
discussion. "Social Network" evokes "
On 30 June 2011 19:49, HaeB wrote:
> I have added your postings to
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:HaeB/Timeline_of_distributed_Wikipedia_proposals
:-D
Do you have an index of this sort of perennial proposal? Apart from,
of course, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Perennial_proposals
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 7:35 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> On 30 June 2011 17:00, Alec Conroy wrote:
>
> [a git-like distributed wikisphere]
>
>> It's not my idea, I believe it's been independently suggested at
>> least five different times that I know of.
I have added your postings to
http://en.wi
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 10:35 AM, David Gerard wrote:
> Adapting MediaWiki to git has been tried a few times. I suspect the
> problem is that the software deeply assumes a database behind it, not
> a version-controlled file tree. Wrong model for an easy fix to
> MediaWiki itself.
Yeah, I don't me
On 30 June 2011 17:00, Alec Conroy wrote:
[a git-like distributed wikisphere]
> It's not my idea, I believe it's been independently suggested at
> least five different times that I know of. But it's a HUGE step that
> would require a big, bold push from developers and thus potentially a
> lar
>> Of course, that could either help or hinder, with no way to
>> know for sure in advance; perhaps encouraging more social interaction
>> would exacerbate and personalize the disputes and conflicts that drive
>> people away.
>>
>
>>From my perspective, this is exactly what is happening. Too many p
> One *big* problem we have now is: Wikipedia has won. Wikipedia is the
> encyclopedia anyone actually consults, ever. Wikipedia now defines
> what an "encyclopedia" is in popular conception.
>
> So we don't have any tail-lights to chase. What sets our direction?
Well, this is now completely and u
> Of course, that could either help or hinder, with no way to
> know for sure in advance; perhaps encouraging more social interaction
> would exacerbate and personalize the disputes and conflicts that drive
> people away.
>
>From my perspective, this is exactly what is happening. Too many people
> On 30 June 2011 12:31, Alec Conroy wrote:
>
>> The further we can get away from the model of elementary schools and
>> towards the model of the global universities, the better.
>
>
> +1
>
> (This entire post is gold.)
>
> One *big* problem we have now is: Wikipedia has won. Wikipedia is the
> en
On 30 June 2011 12:31, Alec Conroy wrote:
> The further we can get away from the model of elementary schools and
> towards the model of the global universities, the better.
+1
(This entire post is gold.)
One *big* problem we have now is: Wikipedia has won. Wikipedia is the
encyclopedia anyone
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Philippe Beaudette
wrote:
> *Call for referendum*: The Wikimedia Foundation, at the direction of the
> Board of Trustees, will be holding a vote to determine whether members of
> the community support the creation and usage of an opt-in personal image
> filter, wh
On 30 June 2011 10:55, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> Tom Morris, 30/06/2011 11:28:
>> I'd have a problem if people started making overwrought
>> comparison to Nazi book burnings too.
> Wow, a reductio ad reductionem ad Hitlerum argument.
Trained professional philosophers can get away with that
Tom Morris, 30/06/2011 11:28:
> I'd have a problem if people started making overwrought
> comparison to Nazi book burnings too.
Wow, a reductio ad reductionem ad Hitlerum argument.
Nemo
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Uns
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 02:02, Fajro wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 9:28 PM, wrote:
>
>> What am I misunderstanding? Surely there is a difference between the "filter
>> bubble" that decides what content to show me on it's own, and an "opt-in"
>> filter where I can decide for myself what cont
16 matches
Mail list logo
