QUOTE
Hi all,
I, with Richard Austin, would like to announce the public launch of "Epistemia", a new Internet-wiki-based encyclopedia project which may be found on the Web at http://epistemia.org/. Some of the project's distinguishing features include:
- users are required to log in before being permitted to edit;
- civil and polite conduct is required, and no tolerance is shown for those people whose intention is to cause disruption or damage;
- people with administrative privileges are required to use their real names as their account names, with few exceptions;
- the project places a high emphasis on developing and maintaining content according to established scholarly standards; and
- policy (content, community, and project standards), which is still in development, is outlined clearly and simply on a single page.
Wikipedia has undoubtedly proved the value of the wiki content production model, but it suffers from a number of damning flaws. Most serious is the negativity of the participatory culture that has developed on Wikipedia—incivility is rampant in discussions, logical, reasoned arguments are commonly ignored, and people acting maliciously or disruptively are tolerated far in excess of common sense. Governance is another issue, with the project led, not by the most knowledgeable people, but by the people with the most spare time and the loudest voices. Also of much concern, especially to academia, is the lack of consistent adherence to the conventional quality expectations associated with professional scholarship—indeed, many contributors reject established scholarly standards in favour of their own conception of what an encyclopedia should be like. These problems can be traced to two primary causes: firstly, an unprofessional culture, and, secondly, overly complex and inconsistently enforced rules. Epistemia aims to correct both these issues, without implementing the overly-restrictive mechanisms that Citizendium has.
Raymond Arritt once summed it all up neatly—"Citizendium ... would be great if it were more similar to Wikipedia (easier to contribute, less bureaucratic) and ... Wikipedia ... would be great if it were more similar to Citizendium (less hostile to competence, more willing to act against troublemakers and those with an agenda)." Epistemia aims to be easy to contribute to, unbureaucratic, welcoming of competence, and intolerant of disruptive and malicious people.
Well, Richard Austin and I would like to invite you to check it out yourself and formulate your own opinions—see http://epistemia.org/.
Best and friendly regards,
—Thomas Larsen
I, with Richard Austin, would like to announce the public launch of "Epistemia", a new Internet-wiki-based encyclopedia project which may be found on the Web at http://epistemia.org/. Some of the project's distinguishing features include:
- users are required to log in before being permitted to edit;
- civil and polite conduct is required, and no tolerance is shown for those people whose intention is to cause disruption or damage;
- people with administrative privileges are required to use their real names as their account names, with few exceptions;
- the project places a high emphasis on developing and maintaining content according to established scholarly standards; and
- policy (content, community, and project standards), which is still in development, is outlined clearly and simply on a single page.
Wikipedia has undoubtedly proved the value of the wiki content production model, but it suffers from a number of damning flaws. Most serious is the negativity of the participatory culture that has developed on Wikipedia—incivility is rampant in discussions, logical, reasoned arguments are commonly ignored, and people acting maliciously or disruptively are tolerated far in excess of common sense. Governance is another issue, with the project led, not by the most knowledgeable people, but by the people with the most spare time and the loudest voices. Also of much concern, especially to academia, is the lack of consistent adherence to the conventional quality expectations associated with professional scholarship—indeed, many contributors reject established scholarly standards in favour of their own conception of what an encyclopedia should be like. These problems can be traced to two primary causes: firstly, an unprofessional culture, and, secondly, overly complex and inconsistently enforced rules. Epistemia aims to correct both these issues, without implementing the overly-restrictive mechanisms that Citizendium has.
Raymond Arritt once summed it all up neatly—"Citizendium ... would be great if it were more similar to Wikipedia (easier to contribute, less bureaucratic) and ... Wikipedia ... would be great if it were more similar to Citizendium (less hostile to competence, more willing to act against troublemakers and those with an agenda)." Epistemia aims to be easy to contribute to, unbureaucratic, welcoming of competence, and intolerant of disruptive and malicious people.
Well, Richard Austin and I would like to invite you to check it out yourself and formulate your own opinions—see http://epistemia.org/.
Best and friendly regards,
—Thomas Larsen
Pros:
- The name is less difficult to remember and spell than citizendium.
- Will not have to put up with people who threaten to rape your wife and burn down your house.
- Instead of making riffs on the admins pseudonyms, we get to bust out the old school schoolyard taunts they've been hearing for 10-80 years.
- Less drive-by vandalism since they need to register an account to write about how much John loves the cock.
Cons
- Too many syllables.
- Still going to be filled primarily with people that used to write for Wikipedia, left angry, and possibly not of their own free will.
- No killer app for readers. Everything they've said so far boils down to nice stuff for people in the back writing the articles or the subjects, but most readers are not subjects and don't deal with the community. No-one's going to write articles no-one's reading.
I smell trouble .... 
