| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
The FUD-based EncyclopediaThe FUD-based EncyclopediaPosted Mar 4, 2005 14:44 UTC (Fri) by imres (guest, #12)In reply to: The FUD-based Encyclopedia by jabby Parent article: The FUD-based Encyclopedia
I agree only partially with your take.
Krowne's article has a great merit, in my view. Mixed with the FUD anti-FUD talk there is an attempt to explain the phenomenon underlying why Wikipedia works and produces content of good quality? And the first step in this direction is Yochai Benkler's seminal paper "Coase's Penguin, or Linux and the Nature of the Firm" http://www.benkler.org/CoasesPenguin.html . Krowne even proposes some interesting extensions to Benkler's theory.
The point is that there is a *lot* of explaining to be done. One of the best places I know of where this explaining is being slowly undertaken is the Many2Many website http://www.corante.com/many/ where a number of columnists including Clay Shirky, Ross Mayfield, Danah Boyd and others are regularly posting some quite ineresting observations and hypothesis.
(Log in to post comments)
The FUD-based Encyclopedia Posted Mar 8, 2005 0:34 UTC (Tue) by illtyd (guest, #2124) [Link] Its one thing to explain how something works. Its another to demonstrate that it does. Does it? The one article referred to by McHenry was corrected. As an earlier comment noted, no-one has done a review of a representative sample of entries and assessed how they have done independently of such a review of the articles, which Krowne claims is unnecessary
|
|
||||||||||||