You should be careful what you wish for. It's not hard to make a 'viable competitor' encyclopedia that would be so corrupt and inaccurate it would make the Fox News network... look like a news network. And if it was glossy and facile enough, plenty of people would probably be dumb enough to use it.
On 07/04/2011, David Gerard <[email protected]> wrote: > Larry Sanger started Citizendium with a detailed plan for precisely > how it would work, which he detailed in a Slashdot article in 2005 and > kept firmly to. This produced the weird phenomenon where he treated > user suggestions like they were *threats*. I just read a Paul Graham > article which contains a line summing up the problem here: > > If you want a recipe for a startup that's going to die, here it > is: a couple of founders who have some great idea they know everyone > is going to love, and that's what they're going to build, no matter > what. > > Knowino (and Argopedia, and the survivors of Citizendium, and everyone > in fact) needs to look at this and see what they can do. Is there room > in the encyclopedia game? I sure hope so. How do you beat Wikipedia? > Work like a startup. Wikipedia now changes at dinosaur pace and seems > utterly unable to solve the problems it knows it has, let alone the > ones it doesn't. If room to zip around it exists, something small > enough to be nimble can find it. > > > - d. > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > -- -Ian Woollard _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
