[Arisbe] prestige and anonymity

[t.gollier at att.net]

Jon,

    Watching the news on General Electric (aka NBC) last night, they were bashing
Wikipedia as well.  They were quoting a professor or two who were arguing that 
Wikipedia might be used for background information but that it was not realiable 
as a "primary source".

    But it seems I've have seen this melodrama before. We, on our side, criticize 
something for claiming to be open but not measuring up to that claim, while the 
real  authoritarians pick up those criticisms, or at least claim we are on their side
too, in order  to thwart any threat, as  paltry as it  might be, to own their monopoly 
on information, knowledge, and thus, to some extent, on thought itself.

Tom

-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Jon Awbrey <jawbrey at att.net>
>
> o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
> 
> steven,
> 
> the time in excess of a year that i have spent working in wikipedia
> and watching what goes on there is enough to convince me that your
> assertion is perfectly accurate, "the public is in jeopardy",
> though perhaps a bit mildly stated.
> 
> i cannot detail the reasons why here, but you can follow
> the trials and tribulations that many diverse people have
> had with wikipedia at the wikipedia review:
> 
> http://wikipediareview.com/
> 
> the wikipedia review also maintains a list of other wiki sites
> that are trying out different sets of principles in hopes of
> correcting the systematic flaws of wikipedia, for instance:
> 
> http://www.opencycle.net/
> http://www.getwiki.net/
> http://wikinfo.org/
> 
> many regards,
> 
> jon awbrey
> 
> cc: arisbe list
>