On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 2:35 AM, David Gerard <[email protected]> wrote: > ...This, btw, is how Citizendium > became a pseudoscience haven: > > http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Citizendium#The_concept_of_expertise_on_Citizendium
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 2:57 AM, David Gerard <[email protected]> wrote: > On 29 August 2010 17:52, David Moran <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Well, right. That's kind of what I mean. These things happened to >> Citizendium because credentialism is the natural outcome of trying to create >> a system of valuing a certain class of contributors more than others. > > > I was amazed just how actively negative credentialism could be - > Shirky posited it as merely putting a dead weight on the project, not > actually driving it backwards. Did anyone actually predict it would > result in CZ becoming a crank magnet? > > If anyone wanted to advocate credentialism on Wikimedia projects, > they'd first have to work out how to fix the pseudoscience problem on > CZ. Irony. David Gerard disparaging CZ using a rationalwiki page as evidence. Pseudo-science, pseudo-humanities, etc are no stranger to Wikipedia, and our processes have not always been victorious over it. Simply put, the rubbish on Wikipedia outweights the rubbish on CZ, and I suspect that an academically sound study would indicate that, proportionally speaking, Wikipedia pollutes the interweb more than CZ. Compare the rationalwiki page for CZ and WP. I wonder how large their WP page would be if a similar level of critical analysis was applied. -- John Vandenberg _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
