Citizendium
Larry Sanger, Wikipedia’s confounder, is at it again. He decided to “fork” Wikipedia, that is to create another flavor, which includes more editorial control, of the famous online encyclopedia. I am part of the project, called Citizendium, and I hope to be able to help Larry with running the discussion lists and to shape the interface design process.
Toward a New Compendium of Knowledge (shorter version)
Larry Sanger
This shorter version was delivered at the Wizards of OS conference. It might be more readable than the longer version, but the longer version has more details.1. Thinkers of the world, start imagining.
There are tens of millions of intellectuals online today. What is possible with tens of millions of intellectuals working together on educational and reference projects? The very thought of that makes me literally quiver with excitement. I am amazed that we, educated people throughout the world, have barely begun to imagine what new reference and educational materials could come into being, if we pool our efforts in the open, collaborative ways demonstrated by open source software hackers. Even less have we begun to take such possibilities really seriously, or actually get to work on them.
Believe it or not I ran into this site this weekend (Someone stole my thunder…) and was looking for source confirmation. What struck me most about Sanger’s opening essay about Citizendium is the idea that often (but not always) the best way to get a better community (or at least one that better suits one’s particular aims or goals) is not to refine an existing community but to make a brand new one.
“Often (not always), if you wish to make any very important changes to an open source or open content project that has an entrenched community, the only way to do it is to start a new community” (Sanger, Section 3, para. 1, 2006).
He recognized the loyalty online members have to their communities “Like all open communities online, Wikipedia’s community is self-selecting, and its policies have determined who stays and who leaves (or is driven away). For this reason, online communities tend to become rather conservative in their attitudes toward their own systems, and Wikipedia is certainly no different. …The first step to solving a problem is to admit that it’s a problem; and much of the Wikipedia community will not admit the problems I’ve listed, unless they have a massive collective change of heart. And, I think, that is very unlikely ever to happen. In fact, you could say that I have waited for several years for it to happen, and it never has.” (Sanger, Section 2, para. 10, 2006).
Like gods, with the Internet we can create and recreate worlds or communities in a process of ongoing refinement. Thankfully, as Weinberger wrote in “Small Pieces Loosely Joined” (2002), the Web has the ability to evolve very rapidly, constantly creating new ways for us to be together (p. 113). The speed of evolution allows us to “experiment” as it were, with communities, at speeds faster than “real time”. If we follow Weinberger’s argument, we are, in a sense, less subject to the burden of time, able to try out new things based on our refined ideas.
Communities – online and offline, but especially online, need space to evolve. Interestingly enough, that does not, at least to Sanger, imply that there should not be boundaries, goals, or ideas set out up front. His “Toward a New Compendium of Knowledge” is an interesting take on the some of the concepts of online interaction and community. (http://www.citizendium.org/essay.html)
——————–
Sanger, L. (2006). Toward a New Compendium of Knowledge. Retrieved September 18, 2006 from http://www.citizendium.org/essay.html#citizendium
Weinberger. D (2002). Small pieces loosely joined. The Cluetrain manifesto. New York: Perseus Publishing.
Apologies. I’m not able to edit the document. Not sure where the big bold text came from. I will edit and adjust as soon as possible.