Wednesday, March 12, 2008

wiki just feels good to find something there—even, or especially, when the article you find is maybe a little clumsily written. Any inelegance, or typo, or relic of vandalism reminds you that this gigantic encyclopedia isn't a commercial product. There are no banners for E*Trade or, no side sprinklings of AdSense.
The Charms of Wikipedia via things

- this was via mefi who saw parallels with mefi, as I did with blogging
...It worked and grew because it tapped into the heretofore unmarshaled energies of the uncredentialed...
...the point of convergence for the self-taught and the expensively educated. The cranks had to consort with the mainstreamers and hash it all out—and nobody knew who really knew what he or she was talking about, because everyone's identity was hidden behind a jokey username.


BwcaBrownie said...

Thanks for that Boynton.
I love splopping around in the wiki connecting up the dots and going off on tangents.
There may be "no side sprinklings of AdSense" but there is probably an entry for it.

peacay said...

Mefi also report on the inevitable venal shenanigans going on in the background.
I do love the idea of 'deletopedia'.

boynton said...

Yeah, I still love Wiki too.

Or should that be as a concept after reading about the shenanigans?

When I read the article,I was in a 'wistful longing' mood about early blogging days and how things seem to have changed, so I appropriated any parallels I could see.
And from the shenanigans:

Look, it's an encyclopedia written and edited by amateurs. Apparently the corporation is run by amateurs, too. What's surprising to me is that there's no way professionals could have built something so successful.*

And, for the record I am an active Wikipedian, and the place disgusts me more and more every day. I have no loyalty to the Wikipedia per se, I just like the concept. But everybody at the top, and all the childish people who are involved in some committee or another, are the worst kinds of humans in the world. Powerless in their own lives for the most part, they all play Evil Dictator on the computer after a soul-crushing day at the office.*

The Wikipedia has a dark, slimy underbelly that is sickening. Imagine the worst academic infighting you have ever seen, multiply by a thousand, and apply even more meaningless and ego driven bullshit as a frosting layer. Sprinkle with paranoia and the inability to back down, and you have your standard Wikipedian attitude*

boynton said...

- also, and meant to add this into the main post,
there's this Deleted articles blog, isn't there?

But wait there's more. While tracking down that URL, I found another post on the same theme lamenting the deleted and the deletionists...

peacay said...

'Wistful longing' will be an entry on the deletopedia and it will display a picture of boynton looking over her shoulder. An mp3 file will play a *sigh*.

I contribute. A little bit. I still don't understand how it all works and never have the patience or desire to find out. It does the trick more often than not.

boynton said...

- but will there be animated gifs?
Hope so.

fifi said...

That was fabulous...I just got completely sidetracked reading that article, and just realised I should have been making some dinner.
very engaging. Hilarious.
But who can avoid the wiki? not I.

boynton said...

hey Fifi.
(love your blog)

Completely sidetracked
would be/should be a good name for next blog.

Juke said...

"the heretofore unmarshaled energies of the self-credentialed"
See the refining toward that makes in seconds what took millenia heretofore. Who credentialed the monastic scholars? Pliny? Oxford? Harvard? Who credentialed the originating crediantialers?
Same as it ever was, only way quicker.

boynton said...

self marshaled...

I love that pic, Juke.

(and not just scholarship but bloggership, your worship)