Home |
|
Talk |
|
Contribs |
|
Wiki-Politics |
See also:L'Aquatique's RFA Q & A Table of contents IntroductioneditI fell some six feet off my loft today, clutching my computer in my arms till the end, of course. Now, quite unfortunately, I didn't have any real religious epiphanies while lying on the hardwood floor looking up at the light with half my brain considering trajectories and gravitational forces and the other screaming "OW", though if you consider the fact that a person who once broke her arm playing duck duck goose (those kids are pretty damn mean!) managed to take a fall that caused her computer screen to bleed without suffering from anything more than a headache, excessive Wikipedia in GeneraleditI like it. Not because it's a particularly awesome encyclopedia, not really even because it's pioneering the Web 2.0 movement (thought that's neat, too), but simply because it's about the closest thing humanity has ever gotten to a collective consciousness (resistance is futile), and that's pretty damn cool... and certainly something I want to be a part of. Some user whose page I read said that he (she?) considers Wikipedia a "grand social experiment," and I think they're right. In many ways, it's a microcosm of the so-called real world, brought down to a size we can see and contemplate without needing to consult the local priest or the Tanakh. Quite simply, Wikipedia isn't a product of people, Wikipedia is people and I think that's kind of mind blowing to think about. Either that or I hit my head harder than I thought. Anonymous EditingeditThere's always talk about requiring registration before one can contribute. That's fine with me, but ya'all are going to have to change the motto. Wikipedia cannot be the Free Encyclopedia that Anyone Can Edit without anonymous editors, and without those anonymous editors we lose that hive mind concept I was talking about earlier, and Wikipedia becomes just another dumb online encyclopedia taking up bandwidth on the internet that I could be using to do something worthwhile, like pay my bills or make webcam whore videos. Vandalism/BlockingeditAs I hinted at earlier, I strongly believe that IP editors are the lifeblood of this project. But I am fully willing to acknowledge that they are conversely also the source of much of vandal patrollers' grief. It's a catch 22, and there's no easy way to fix it. However, I think that more effective blocking can go a long way. Looking at the talk pages of established vandals is enough to give even lucky-concussionless folk headaches- a hodgepodge of multihued warnings in no particular order and increasingly violent sounding-block notices. I believe admins need to be swifter to wield the ban-hammer in cases where a particular IP has already been blocked before. Copyrightedit
I find copyright socially disruptive, morally unethical, and all around pointless. Just because we create something doesn't mean we own it, otherwise child slavery would be legal. Copyright laws are excessively bureaucratic to the point of obfuscative and usually require a Harvard Law Professor to interpret: something lawyers aren't necessarily very good at. ConsensuseditI really think the way Wikipedia is governed is brilliant. The idea of consensus- that is, the quality of opinions over quantity, really highlights what makes this encyclopedia so special. The one thing that really gets me is something I'm going to call... AdminshipeditSo, I'm probably going to be RFAing sometime in the relatively near future (maybe a few months), and I should probably also talk about what I believe adminship is all about.
|