All, Comments on this launch plan invited: http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,631.0.html
We're going to launch quite soon. No date is set, but a few weeks from now--as soon as possible. As you may know, we have been putting off our launch (i.e., allowing the public to view CZ) until we obtained the servers we need to handle the traffic. Well, we've decided to go ahead and obtain four servers, for a total of five (two of these, and installation, kindly donated to the cause by Steadfast). These should be installed this week, which means that launch is going to happen soon. Beyond server work, there isn't a lot of other *technical* work that we absolutely need to do in order to launch. We've got to create a CZ: namespace and move the Citizendium Pilot: namespace documents into it. We've got to slap "Beta" on the logo. And we've got to make sure the license scheme we adopt is reflected by the links we have on article pages. Also, **if** we can manage it, I'd like to get the semi-automated application hand-approval system written and working, i.e., the system that will allow people to submit their registration on a Web form, and let constables get them into the system by pressing a button. Even if we *don't* do this, we're already using a new method for getting people on board within a day (usually), via e-mail. Thanks bunches to our constables for making that happen! Also, no doubt post-launch, we will want to code up our approval process so that it is simpler (and thus more inviting) for editors. Doing an approval right now requires approvers to be pretty adept with the software. So, we'll get this fixed eventually too. Other things I want to do before launch involve decisionmaking, organizing, writing, and wiki work--in other words, non-technical stuff. This is all hard work, by the way. Anyone who says that online projects grow "organically" really doesn't know anything about it. Even Wikipedia didn't grow "organically": it grew exactly to the extent that lots of individuals did various bits of very hard work, from writing articles, to debating policy, to formatting help pages, and so forth. There is no substitute for our doing the same thing, if we want to make this thing happen. And, by golly, it *is* going to happen--or rather, it is already happening! ================= Decision: license The only decision that I think is *really* pressing is the license issue. I have it from a very highly-placed source that we shouldn't "worry too much" about GFDL/CC-by-sa compatibility. On that person's recommendation, I am leaning toward something I was already favoring, namely, dual-licensing *all* CZ articles GFDL and CC-by-sa. The grounds for doing this are, in brief (!), as follows. First, we *must* source Wikipedia articles using the GFDL. Second, we really do want to allow our contributors to use Wikipedia material. Third, there is no restriction (I think) on our releasing *our own* edits under CC-by-sa *as well as* the GFDL. Fourth, licensing *exclusively* using GFDL is suboptimal simply because we don't want to rely exclusively on a license that, quite frankly, doesn't make any sense as a license for wiki-developed encyclopedia articles. Fifth, having the same licensing for all articles will save us a lot of headaches. Finally, I will want to say that, while of course each contributor retains copyright over his or her contributions, the Citizendium Foundation must also be granted a nonexclusive copyright, which we may use to re-release all versions of an article, and all CZ articles en masse, under the same (two?) licenses. So, future entities that make copies of CZ's articles may do so by dealing with just one legal entity, namely the CZ Foundation. Discuss these issues, which are BY NO MEANS finally decided, here: http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,607.0.html Obviously, I owe you a longer argument, and a set of replies to the excellent discussion that has taken place. In particular I need to address the debate about whether we should permit commercial uses or not: to the extent we don't, we can't use Wikipedia articles. Anyway, as I go through this discussion, I might well change my mind as I work through that material, which I have only started to do. I'd like to get this decided finally by the end of the week. ========== Organizing As to organizing, I've got 37 members of an Editorial Council to get started. We need to set up a mailing list and start using it. I think the first thing we should discuss--unless it's the Editorial Council's procedures--should be what new workgroups to adopt. By the way, I also want to delete the various "Other" workgroup pages (like "Other Natural Science"), since they aren't in use and frankly were probably never a good idea in the first place. (If anybody wants to just go ahead and do that, be my guest. I guarantee that nobody's going to object; put {{speedydelete}} on what you can't delete yourself.) Sometime soon, moreover, we really need to take some more steps toward getting active workgroups going. Wiki work has been proceeding apace without workgroups being active. But workgroups seem to be necessary for us to be able to make maximal use of our editor pool; I think we'll also see a lot more article approvals happening when there are, essentially, more self-aware communities of editors. So, I am thinking that we should probably set up mailing lists for the various workgroups--those that have enough interested people, anyway. I think we also really need to get our new Editorial Personnel Administrators started, since we need more such people in order to handle new editor applications. I've no doubt that we would be doing more recruitment if we felt we could handle the load of new applications. ========= Wiki work I would like to start the Big Cleanup this week, too. Learn about it and discuss it here: http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,590.0.html) This will remove templates, category tags, add CZ Live tags, check the "Content is from Wikipedia?", and other such "administrative" stuff. We could, at the same time, start using the Article Checklist, which you can learn about here: http://pilot.citizendium.org/wiki/Citizendium_Pilot:The_Article_Checklist and discuss it here: http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,587.0.html We really need detailed, constructive feedback on both the Big Cleanup and the Article Checklist before we get started with them. ======= Writing I've been at work on a new essay, "Why the Citizendium Will Succeed," which I hope will motivate contributors. I think many people are sitting on the sidelines, watching with interest, wondering if this CZ thing is going to take off. I'll argue, among other things, that if we simply continue as we have been, but open the project up, semi-automate registration, and continue to develop process and policy, the Google effect will see to it that we grow and that our rate of growth will accelerate over time. I will also be drafting (or helping to draft) several policy pages: licensing introduction; article mechanics; naming conventions; the policy on family friendliness; citation policy; image policy; and probably others, particularly some constable policy pages. I will also be creating several background and help pages, such a page on the differences between CZ and Wikipedia, and a separate page about how to get started as an editor. After this work, I'll revisit the Project Home page. I hope project regulars will feel emboldened enough to help me with most of these policy pages, since it will be hard to do it all myself! But I'll be writing on the wiki quite a bit over the next couple of weeks. Hope to see you there. --Larry Comments here please: http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,631.0.html _______________________________________________ Citizendium-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/citizendium-l
