Was reading up on this. Not clear on their exact peer review process except that it clearly assumes that citations should not be dependant on main stream media or printed books... that in fact the experts are out there and are involved.
not clear how this process will work... or how someone might rise to the status of expert on a topic, but my guess is it would involve identifying expert sources and individuals on the web, such as specific blogs on an industry or topic. Anyway it's best sumarized as a consensus based "expert" peer review process. And also... it doesn't allow for anonymous edits. I do think... and I will just come out and say it... that Jimmy wales is WRONG about annoymous editing. It does NOT protect users and is unecissary. You can create a profile and login that is anonymous... people do it all the time on various services... this is actually a better protection for both the user and the service, ie. wikipedia. Anyway... I just heard abut citizendium today... who knows if it will go anywhere at all.. . but these are all experiments in better collaboration and self governance. As such they are all important. Oh! And regardless of what happens with wikipedia I think it's time we just say f*ck wikipedia and start creating our own article on the vbgroup pbwiki jay dedman has created. Peace, -Mike mmeiser.com/blog On 5/2/07, sull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > With all the wikipedia talk, I thought I would make mention of Citizendium. > What do you think about this project? > > http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Main_Page > > Over on AssignmentZero, their is a crowdsourced article that will be up on > Wired.com tomorrow. > It goes into the origins of Wikipedia and Citizendium. > Here is one of the drafts: > > http://zero.newassignment.net/filed/weve_got_draft > > > Sull > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
