Ken Arromdee wrote: > Telling someone to just fix it tells them to fix the symptoms of a problem. > It rarely fixes the actual problem. And hoping that many people, all fixing > one mistake each, will fix the problem together isn't going to work; the > problem is not just that we have a lot of mistakes, it's that the mistakes > have an underlying cause. Fixing the mistakes doesn't fix the underlying > cause. > > And the complainer can't fix the underlying cause. That's for us to do, and > we need to listen when someone complains, not tell him to just fix it. > > Interesting to compare this with something else Morozov has apparently argued (http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/tag/evgeny-morozov/) "The Internet can actually inhibit rather than empower civil society". Those unreliable folk on Wikipedia define civil society as follows: "Civil society is composed of the totality of voluntary civic and social organizations and institutions that form the basis of a functioning society as opposed to the force-backed structures of a state (regardless of that state's political system) and commercial institutions of the market." Sounds a bit to me as if "sofixit" is a snappy way of defining participation from the side of civil society, without the guns or cash to fix underlying causes. Sure, patching up a given Wikipedia article is just a form of do-gooding, not changing the reasons it was flawed (ignorance or bias being a couple that might be involved).
Since Wikipedia in fact contradicts Morozov's thesis, perhaps it is not so surprising he advances the criticisms he does. Charkes _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
