Citizendium mostly composed of disgruntled Wikipedia editors???

[Zachary Pruckowski]

Anyway, I'd still want to know, to get this thread back on topic: Are the majority of Citizendians "disgruntled Wikipedia editors", ie. people that were unhappy with Wikipedia and gave it up? Also, does anyone ever contribute to both?

As I've already said, there's no way of knowing that.  With hundreds of people working, I don't even know most people's names.  I know there are some people on here who were former Wikipedians (I did some editing there under a username and anonymously), and I know of at least 2 people who are current Wikipedians who are on the CZ wiki, although neither of them seem all that active.

But getting some sort of statistics or something is an idea bound to fail.

[Chris Day]

Good guess.   

Thought so!

Anyway, I'd still want to know, to get this thread back on topic: Are the majority of Citizendians "disgruntled Wikipedia editors", ie. people that were unhappy with Wikipedia and gave it up? Also, does anyone ever contribute to both?

Of the people i have interacted with here about 50% have no experience of working on a wiki. Of those with wiki experience none seem disgruntled. My sense is that those with no experience of wikipedia think it has less to offer this project, whereas those with wiki experience seem to think there is a lot of good stuff that can be harvested from wikipedia. So my gut feeling is that these are not disgruntled editors from wikipedia. More likely editors seeking a new environment with new challenges.

[Steven B. Harris]

Well, on Wikipedia, the administrators, in order to wield their power anonymously, have come up the idea that if they use their real names, somebody will Wiki-stalk them. If somebody finds out they are cryonicists, Mr. Freeze will come in and get them in the middle of the night, or something. But Wikipedia has no problem with aggressive biographies (ie, those which the biography target doesn't approve of). Wikipedians have a hard time with this kind of empathy, but no trouble at all when it comes to their own oxes being gored. The level of paranoia and powertripping on Wikipedia must be seen to be believed.    Anyway, we'll see if it's any better, here. From what I can see, it's already shaping up to be altogether a friendlier place. Never know who you'll meet here that you actually know in the real world!  Steve.

[Peter J. King]

there isn't as much fear of "experts" going on a power trip and feeling like "gods" with "godlike infallibility", etc

Instead of experts going on power trips, Wikipedians have "administrators" going on power trips.

I didn't edit there for very long, but my experience was more that administrators didn't do enough to deal with disruptive editors.

Peter

[Peter J. King]

I tried editing Wikipedia a few times anonymously, and then opened an account when I was approached (by e-mail) by an editor who wanted more philosophers to help out at articles such as "Philosophy".  It didn't take long to realise that it was an impossible task; two or three editors whose persistence and aggression was matched only by their peculiar understanding of the subject made serious editing an impossibility, and the administrators who were appealed to seemed unable or unwilling to do much about it.  I shouldn't say that I came here as a disgruntled Wikipedia editor, as I'd stopped editing there before I came here, but I certainly am one.

Peter