w6: "A Globe in Accord"

 

1.

The problem with Wikipedia is that it only works in practice. In theory, it can never work. — Zeroeth Law

it is also no more immune to human nature than any other utopian project. Pettiness, idiocy, and vulgarity are regular features of the site. Nothing about high-minded collaboration guarantees accuracy, and open editing invites abuse.” What Wikipedia’s collaborative culture does, what any culture with positive norms like “Don’t Bite the Newcomers” or “Assume Good Faith” can do, is dampen Godwin’s Law and call upon “the better angels of our nature.” Those pursuing the universal encyclopedia believe that while our better nature is not always present, it is at least latent. Wikipedia's technology is, of course, excellent. However, a culture that promotes people to contribute in good faith community plays a more important role in Wikipedia's operation. But, No doubt, the community will change, but change is inevitable. Almost a century ago the seminal sociologist Max Weber noted that organizations often develop toward bureaucratic forms. We shouldn’t be surprised that the same has happened to Wikipedia. In the most extreme and unlikely case, even if the community disappeared and all that was left was a snapshot of its content, Wikipedia still would have been an amazing phenomenon. Even a frozen carcass of Wikipedia content would continue to be a useful resource.

2.

I was a little dissatisfied with the phenomenon of other independent wikis breaking out of Wikipedia. This is because those types of wikis are usually personal blogs in quality, but are only borrowing the authority of wikis in form. They often hurt people and make money by using unreliable information as plausible.

3.

The reason why people write wiki is because of their happiness in a rough summary. And human happiness is, after all, complicated. What diversity is needed for Wikipedia?