|
|
John Moffett
New Arrival
Posts: 7
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: October 04, 2007, 04:15:18 AM » |
|
I love the what's my article resolution. I am a bit less enthusiastic about the message resolution because it really is just asking for personal opinions on a topic.
I’m not sure where such articles would fit into CZ.
JRM
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Larry Sanger
|
|
« Reply #2 on: October 04, 2007, 09:22:13 AM » |
|
The short and honest answer is that they wouldn't really fit into CZ--taken as a reference work--at all. The hope is simply that people might be motivated to contribute their "message," and as a result warm to the idea of joining CZ.
I like the proposal, but I am not 100% committed to it. I am proposing it merely as a way to bring people into the fold.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Nereo Preto
Forum Participant
Posts: 118
|
|
« Reply #3 on: October 04, 2007, 10:10:27 AM » |
|
As John Muffett, I find "What's my article" worth a try, but I am skeptic about "What's my message".
People wishing to post their message are, with an higher-than-average probability, people with an agenda. We don't want to attract this kind of guys I believe.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Day
|
|
« Reply #4 on: October 04, 2007, 02:38:00 PM » |
|
people with an agenda With this is mind it might well be a good idea to carefully weigh the pro's and cons for what's my message. The last thing we want is to lend CZ's weight (assuming we get some in the future), to fringe ideas. What are the chances that many of the what's my message pages will be fringe at best? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Martin Baldwin-Edwards
|
|
« Reply #5 on: October 04, 2007, 03:29:57 PM » |
|
People wishing to post their message are, with an higher-than-average probability, people with an agenda I wonder if this really is an issue...There will not be an obvious problem with commercial or political interests, as WP has suffered recently, so there will only be an issue with opinions and bias. Does it matter? We all have a right to an opinion, no matter how stupid it is. The problem is when people with absurd views and slanted agendas try to present their ideas as mainstream thinking. This will not happen here, because the article is personalized. Problem solved! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Aleta Curry
|
|
« Reply #6 on: October 04, 2007, 03:52:02 PM » |
|
Yes, I guess I'm less worried about lunatics posted lunacy--they will look like lunatics.
I'm a bit more worried about sane people proposing immorality: e.g., there are some very rational bigots our there.
The thing I would really worry about is just practical: if all these people start flooding CZ and trying to write biased articles in the namespace, won't the constables be working overtime?
Then again, maybe such people don't want to use their real names, give contact info, etc.?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Ewen
Guest
|
|
« Reply #7 on: October 04, 2007, 04:03:58 PM » |
|
What do we do when we have a white supremacist arguing for their philosophy? What do we do when we have a holocaust denier? What do we do when we have a ___________________ ?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Martin Baldwin-Edwards
|
|
« Reply #8 on: October 04, 2007, 04:09:03 PM » |
|
The expression, Stephen, is to "let them hang by their own nooses'
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RJensen
Forum Communicator
Posts: 190
|
|
« Reply #9 on: October 04, 2007, 05:05:04 PM » |
|
the serious risk is that readers will think CZ is loonie if it encourages loonies to gather here...and I think they would be right
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Aleta Curry
|
|
« Reply #10 on: October 04, 2007, 08:19:36 PM » |
|
the serious risk is that readers will think CZ is loonie if it encourages loonies to gather here...and I think they would be right
I'd be worried about this if it were in mainspace--but in a clearly-designated "corner"--you know, like the old poet's corner or bandbox where anyone could get up and say anything? [shrug]. What do we do when we have a white supremacist arguing for their philosophy? What do we do when we have a holocaust denier?... Make sure they have enough rope...! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Martin Baldwin-Edwards
|
|
« Reply #11 on: October 04, 2007, 08:50:50 PM » |
|
I'm glad we agree on this, Aleta [as usual]  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Robert_W_King
|
|
« Reply #12 on: October 04, 2007, 08:56:27 PM » |
|
What do we do when we have a white supremacist arguing for their philosophy? What do we do when we have a holocaust denier? What do we do when we have a ___________________ ?
Even though it *might* be recognized that the particular philosophy or message in question is associated with the user, there will always be those that will stick out a big fat finger, pointing and yelling "Citizendium supports white supremacists! Citizendium Supports holocost deniers... etc" and frankly I'd rather not have the risk of that happening. A counter-argument might be that people automatically *assume* that wikipedia has these unsavory type people on it, but then the counter-counter-argument will be "oh that's just because anyone can edit wikipedia, there's no control over that." That said, maybe the "my message" space should have to be approved before it can be viewed by all? I would rather not have our system sullied up by these kinds of nefarious tools. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Hayford Peirce
Forum Communicator
Posts: 345
|
|
« Reply #13 on: October 04, 2007, 10:21:26 PM » |
|
Suppose that the majesterial Merriam-Webster's Second Edition International Unabridged, 1932 edition, which is my bible, had, after its 3200 regular pages, and then its 350 chronological history pages, another 200 pages called "Crazies"? And therein we would find all the nutty opinions of the 600 1930-type people who had put together the dictionary about *other* subjects, their own particular hobbyhorses. You might have a *great* lexicographer who was an ace about 16th-century adjectives -- but who also was an ardent fan of Adolf Hitler. Sure, today, that would be only of historical interest to see something like that in an otherwise Gold Standard reference work -- but, at the time, I'm sure it would have raised more than one eyebrow, and would have led to a lack of respect for the dictionary.
Same thing today -- why, in even the most *peripheral* way, would CZ want to be associated with, or be seeming to give its imprimature to, all of the *gazillions* of agenda-driven nuts who are out there? Just check out WP if you don't believe me....
Let them start their *own* wiki and do whatever they want with it!
If you let this project come to fruition, trust me, CZ will suffer!
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 04, 2007, 10:23:35 PM by Hayford Peirce »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RJensen
Forum Communicator
Posts: 190
|
|
« Reply #14 on: October 05, 2007, 02:41:33 AM » |
|
Suppose we have 9 ordinary messages of minimal interest and one that is wildly off-the-wall -- will we get praise for having 9 dull messages or ridicule for having the 10th? I suggest the loonie crowd out there would be delighted to have a prestigious location to post their lunacies. As for the 9 other posters, why should we suppose they will join our community and help edit articles? It's a lose-lose proposition for us. What's more, if we do attract the crazies and decide to junk the experiment in a few days we nevertheless will have a ridiculous reputation for months or years to come--the sort of amusing episode journalists will write about when they consider CZ.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
