Mailing List Archive

Should we offer to host citizendium?
Should we offer to host citizendium?

Okey get over the instinctive reaction.

==The background==
Those who have read this week's signpost will be aware that
citizendium is in significant financial difficulties. If not see the
end of the briefly section:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2010-11-08/News_and_notes

Now I know we haven't exactly had the best of relationships with
citizendium but we are if not distant allies at least interested
observers. Their mission and much of their product at this time
coincides with ours.

==The proposal==

We should offer to host citizendium on our servers at no cost for a
period of 1 (one) year offering a level of support equivalent to our
smaller projects. After one year the citizendium community/Editorial
Council is expected to have sorted themselves out to the point where
they can arrange their own hosting. At which point we lock the
database and provide them with the dumps


===The pros===

*It is inline with out mission
*It wouldn't cost very much. Given their traffic levels and database
size the cost to host would probably be lower than some of our more
prolific image uploaders.
*It would be possible to effectively give them instacommons
*Citizendium is an interesting project and gives us a way to learn
what the likely outcome of some alternative approaches would be
*It helps with positioning the WMF as more than just wikipedia
*It prevents the citizendium project from dying which since they have
useful content would be unfortunate

===The cons===
*They may still be on PostgreSQL rather than mysql which could create
issues with compatibility
*Some of their community are people banned from wikipedia
*risk of looking like triumphalism over Larry (can be addressed by
making sure jimbo is in no way involved)
*keeping control of the relationship between the citizendium
community/Editorial Council and the various WMF communities
*Handing the password database back at the end of the year would need
to be done with care.


All in all other than the assuming we can deal with the database issue
I think it is something we should do. The citizendium
community/Editorial Council may well say no but at least we will have
tried.

--
geni

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
Would not opposed or see this as a drama issue. After all it doesn't involve
editorial involvement or conflict of interests, it would be clear (and clear
to anyone in public) that no editorial influence would be implicated.

My only concern is on precedent - is this a good one (we help others in the
free knowledge/education world) or a bad one (our bandwidth is open to be
used by any forum or website with a story to tell). Would perception and
reporting in the media that we altruistically can help others (positive
views) or that we take over or dominate others (even if untrue, negative
views)? is there any risk that it would be seen as compromising our stance
and neutrality ("Wikipedia hosts/hosted Citizendium!)

:last, I'd look for specific agreement what happens if they cannot regain
financial stability and independence. Do they linger indefinitely, or
dwindle indefinitely, on WMF servers? Do they start to need other forms of
help? Do we get the bad press if we have to shut them down? What if such a
situation descends into antipathy (there's been antipathy before, we don't
need to invite more in future). Do Citizendium's users get a say or will
this be done without their consensus (and hence possibly get anger from some
directed at WMF)?

For all these reasons I'd want clarity and openness on the various "what
ifs" and how they are agreed to be handled, in a way that all can see that a
prior and mutually endorsed decision process was followed in that
eventuality.

Those would be my questions. They may be fine, but they are the ones I would
focus on as deciders, given that bandwidth and tech support will probably
not be a huge factor (use their own server or make a spare one available?).


FT2

On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 7:56 AM, geni <geniice@gmail.com> wrote:

> Should we offer to host citizendium?
>
> Okey get over the instinctive reaction.
>
> ==The background==
> Those who have read this week's signpost will be aware that
> citizendium is in significant financial difficulties. If not see the
> end of the briefly section:
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2010-11-08/News_and_notes
>
> Now I know we haven't exactly had the best of relationships with
> citizendium but we are if not distant allies at least interested
> observers. Their mission and much of their product at this time
> coincides with ours.
>
> ==The proposal==
>
> We should offer to host citizendium on our servers at no cost for a
> period of 1 (one) year offering a level of support equivalent to our
> smaller projects. After one year the citizendium community/Editorial
> Council is expected to have sorted themselves out to the point where
> they can arrange their own hosting. At which point we lock the
> database and provide them with the dumps
>
>
> ===The pros===
>
> *It is inline with out mission
> *It wouldn't cost very much. Given their traffic levels and database
> size the cost to host would probably be lower than some of our more
> prolific image uploaders.
> *It would be possible to effectively give them instacommons
> *Citizendium is an interesting project and gives us a way to learn
> what the likely outcome of some alternative approaches would be
> *It helps with positioning the WMF as more than just wikipedia
> *It prevents the citizendium project from dying which since they have
> useful content would be unfortunate
>
> ===The cons===
> *They may still be on PostgreSQL rather than mysql which could create
> issues with compatibility
> *Some of their community are people banned from wikipedia
> *risk of looking like triumphalism over Larry (can be addressed by
> making sure jimbo is in no way involved)
> *keeping control of the relationship between the citizendium
> community/Editorial Council and the various WMF communities
> *Handing the password database back at the end of the year would need
> to be done with care.
>
>
> All in all other than the assuming we can deal with the database issue
> I think it is something we should do. The citizendium
> community/Editorial Council may well say no but at least we will have
> tried.
>
> --
> geni
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
On 12 November 2010 07:56, geni <geniice@gmail.com> wrote:

> We should offer to host citizendium on our servers at no cost for a
> period of 1 (one) year offering a level of support equivalent to our
> smaller projects. After one year the citizendium community/Editorial
> Council is expected to have sorted themselves out to the point where
> they can arrange their own hosting. At which point we lock the
> database and provide them with the dumps


I strongly support this.

The discussion on the RationalWiki talk page continues, with active
participation from many Citizens:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Citizendium#WIGOCZ

Their current problem is that they have never had to think about this
stuff, ever, and suddenly find themselves with no support and
desperately gathering cash to pay their ridiculously overpriced
hosting ($700/mo).

Despite past personal conflicts, CZ is the sort of project we should
encourage, i.e. free educational content. It is in fact having other
people support our mission. Which is an even bigger win than
supporting it ourselves.

Thankfully, CZ's techies are quite competent (and Dan Nessett is
active in MediaWiki itself, as he tries to bring the CZ software back
to mainline), so can presumably sling dumps around with facility.

Important points:

* Having CZ maintain independence would be essential. CZ would not
become a WMF project ... as such. They're just someone who needs help
and is in line with our mission. So a 6-month or 12-month time would
be quite reasonable to both us and them.
* It's unclear as yet who owns the name, who "owns" the private
databases (the password table, private data and so on). This would
need to be established.

But we should make the offer.


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
On 12 November 2010 08:12, FT2 <ft2.wiki@gmail.com> wrote:

> My only concern is on precedent - is this a good one (we help others in the
> free knowledge/education world) or a bad one (our bandwidth is open to be
> used by any forum or website with a story to tell). Would perception and
> reporting in the media that we altruistically can help others (positive
> views) or that we take over or dominate others (even if untrue, negative
> views)? is there any risk that it would be seen as compromising our stance
> and neutrality ("Wikipedia hosts/hosted Citizendium!)


The precedent sounds good to me, actually. In this case, it's helping
a wiki that is not only completely in line with our mission, but is
presently in dire need.

For comparison, let's say OpenStreetMap suddenly went broke. I'd say
that in such a hypothetical case, hosting them would be not merely a
good thing to do, but the right thing to do.

More general hosting of other organisations - the comparison would be
with ibiblio.org - would be new, and we'd need the technical human
resources, which are barely keeping up with our own needs. (Which is
why it's good in this case that CZ's techies are eminently competent.)
But that's different from helping an organisation with comparable
goals that happens to be in dire present need.


> For all these reasons I'd want clarity and openness on the various "what
> ifs" and how they are agreed to be handled, in a way that all can see that a
> prior and mutually endorsed decision process was followed in that
> eventuality.


CZ now has a management council and an Editor in Chief (Daniel
Mietchen), so there is someone who can actually decide such things and
work out the deal. Though as I noted, it's unclear who owns the name
"Citizendium," for example.


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
Hoi,
Providing help to an organisation that can be considered part of the
Wikimedia movement makes sense. The issue with Citizendium is that they
explicitly distance themselves from many of the basic corner stones of what
has made Wikipedia what it is.

Citizendium does not add anything to our own projects and given the existing
policies for new projects it is a competing project to the English language
Wikipedia and as such it is a third encyclopaedic project in the English
language. This makes for a limited offer of help ie no adoption.

The notion that Jimmy should not be involved in order to prevent
"triumphalism" is naive. Even when he is not to be involved, he will be
asked by the press to comment. He may and he will. Asking him not to be
involved is not feasible because as a board member it is his job to have an
opinion and be part of the decision process. It should also be clear that
he will certainly not be the only one who will see this mishap of
Citizendium as a vindication of the Wikimedia model.

Giving Citizendium a breathing space for a limited time period is fine with
me. This should in my opinion be on the basis of providing them hosting on
iron. Iron separate from the WMF infra structure. When it is to be for a
limited time period, it should be plain what happens when such a time period
will be exceeded. <grin> I would even like the idea of us helping
encyclopaedia Brittanica in a similar way </grin>
Thanks,
GerardM



On 12 November 2010 08:56, geni <geniice@gmail.com> wrote:

> Should we offer to host citizendium?
>
> Okey get over the instinctive reaction.
>
> ==The background==
> Those who have read this week's signpost will be aware that
> citizendium is in significant financial difficulties. If not see the
> end of the briefly section:
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2010-11-08/News_and_notes
>
> Now I know we haven't exactly had the best of relationships with
> citizendium but we are if not distant allies at least interested
> observers. Their mission and much of their product at this time
> coincides with ours.
>
> ==The proposal==
>
> We should offer to host citizendium on our servers at no cost for a
> period of 1 (one) year offering a level of support equivalent to our
> smaller projects. After one year the citizendium community/Editorial
> Council is expected to have sorted themselves out to the point where
> they can arrange their own hosting. At which point we lock the
> database and provide them with the dumps
>
>
> ===The pros===
>
> *It is inline with out mission
> *It wouldn't cost very much. Given their traffic levels and database
> size the cost to host would probably be lower than some of our more
> prolific image uploaders.
> *It would be possible to effectively give them instacommons
> *Citizendium is an interesting project and gives us a way to learn
> what the likely outcome of some alternative approaches would be
> *It helps with positioning the WMF as more than just wikipedia
> *It prevents the citizendium project from dying which since they have
> useful content would be unfortunate
>
> ===The cons===
> *They may still be on PostgreSQL rather than mysql which could create
> issues with compatibility
> *Some of their community are people banned from wikipedia
> *risk of looking like triumphalism over Larry (can be addressed by
> making sure jimbo is in no way involved)
> *keeping control of the relationship between the citizendium
> community/Editorial Council and the various WMF communities
> *Handing the password database back at the end of the year would need
> to be done with care.
>
>
> All in all other than the assuming we can deal with the database issue
> I think it is something we should do. The citizendium
> community/Editorial Council may well say no but at least we will have
> tried.
>
> --
> geni
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 8:13 PM, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hoi,
> Providing help to an organisation that can be considered part of the
> Wikimedia movement makes sense. The issue with Citizendium is that they
> explicitly distance themselves from many of the basic corner stones of what
> has made Wikipedia what it is.

Which cornerstone is that?

--
John Vandenberg

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
On 12 November 2010 10:13, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>wrote:

> <grin> I would even like the idea of us helping
> encyclopaedia Brittanica in a similar way </grin>
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
> Brittanica may or may not be in need of some help, I don't know. But the
Norwegian equivalent "Store Norske Leksikon" is definitely in need of some
help. The publishing company have made an unsuccessful attempt at getting
governmental financial aid after about a year of offering an
advertisement-supported portal with an alternative way to involve the public
in extending it. With not only one, but two 50000+ Norwegian language
Wikipedias to compete against, that attempt lasted about a year when they
found that they would not succeed alone. The government has refused to help,
but they gave the source away, and now some private money - 30 MNOK - is
available for the resulting project for the next 3 years.

I don't think they are anywhere near wanting "our" help, but I as a
Wikipedian in the biggest of the two Norwegian Wikipedias, no.wikipedia.org,
I would definitely have been supportive of giving aid in the form of
hosting.

We have become the superpower, and that gives us a moral obligation to think
beyond our own projects. Among the things we ought to be wary of is
monoculture. If Wikipedia becomes the only source for encyclopaedic
information, not only does that make the world poorer, but it makes our own
projects poorer. Wikipedia needs the competition, if for no other reason
than for strengthening ourselves.

Hans A. Rosbach
no:user:haros
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
2010/11/12 John Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com>:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 8:13 PM, Gerard Meijssen
> <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hoi,
>> Providing help to an organisation that can be considered part of the
>> Wikimedia movement makes sense. The issue with Citizendium is that they
>> explicitly distance themselves from many of the basic corner stones of what
>> has made Wikipedia what it is.
>
> Which cornerstone is that?
>

I think the most serious problem with them is that they do not follow
NPOV. Instead they follow a kind of biased-sympathetic-expert-POV. The
mechanism in which they have an expert leaders who can make final
editoral decissions made them vulnerable to these experts POV. It
produces devasting results in some humanities areas as well as some
other controversial issues. If you have diffrent POV than the expert
in charge of the article you cannot overcome that obvious POV because
you are merely a "non-expert citizen". For example see their article
about homeopathy, which is terribly pro-homeopathy biased:

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Homeopathy

because the final shape of the article was in charge of the person who
is active pro-homeopathy advocate and proved to be "expert" by
providing a diploma in homeopathy issued by one of the US homeopathy
organisation. Therefore, scientific mainstream medical POV over the
issue is almost ignored.

Anyway, I think it is worth helping Citzendium, but in a way to leave
their editorial policy freedom and clearly state, that they are not
going to be Wikimedia project, but they are a different approach,
interesting but not in line with some of our basic values such as
"anyone can edit on equal base" and "NPOV".



--
Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
http://www.ptchem.lodz.pl/en/TomaszGanicz.html

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 9:03 PM, Tomasz Ganicz <polimerek@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/11/12 John Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com>:
>> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 8:13 PM, Gerard Meijssen
>> <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hoi,
>>> Providing help to an organisation that can be considered part of the
>>> Wikimedia movement makes sense. The issue with Citizendium is that they
>>> explicitly distance themselves from many of the basic corner stones of what
>>> has made Wikipedia what it is.
>>
>> Which cornerstone is that?
>>
>
> I think the most serious problem with them is that they do not follow
> NPOV. Instead they follow a kind of biased-sympathetic-expert-POV.

Is that systematic, symptomatic or merely evidenced in a small set of articles?

I've seen lots of people point out specific problems with their
content, but we have many problem articles too.

> Anyway, I think it is worth helping Citzendium, but in a way to leave
> their editorial policy freedom and clearly state, that they are not
> going to be Wikimedia project, but they are a different approach,
> interesting but not in line with some of our basic values such as
> "anyone can edit on equal base" and "NPOV".

I agree with everything except whether or not they are in line with
our basic values. They may not align with Wikipedia's values, but as
a separate project they dont need to be; instead they need to fit
within the core values that all our projects have in common.

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Values

--
John Vandenberg

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 8:56 AM, David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12 November 2010 07:56, geni <geniice@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> We should offer to host citizendium on our servers at no cost for a
>> period of 1 (one) year offering a level of support equivalent to our
>> smaller projects. After one year the citizendium community/Editorial
>> Council is expected to have sorted themselves out to the point where
>> they can arrange their own hosting. At which point we lock the
>> database and provide them with the dumps
>
>
> I strongly support this.

+1

Magnus

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
Hi all;

*In the case that Citizendium is going to close*, that I'm not sure yet, I
think that we have two debates. 1) Offering hosting to Citizendium 2)
Preserving the articles and images.

About the first question. I doubt WMF is going to offer hosting to
Citizendium. When Wikipedia passed Nupedia, it was forgot gradually, and
finally closed. I don't know if WMF has thought to revive Nupedia, but I
don't think so.

Wikipedia and her sister projects have an open design, everyone can edit.
Citizendium is not so open, it is an expert-written encyclopedia, so, I
don't think that it is a good idea to host such a project together with WMF
wikis.

About the second question. I think that there is no doubt, we (interested
people) have to preserve the data. *If Citizendium closes*, it would be nice
that WMF hosts a frozen copy of Citizendium in English Wikisource, as I
requested for Nupedia articles some weeks ago[1] (with little support). The
same for the two unique GNUPedia articles available.[2] This is part of the
human history trying to write an Internet encyclopedia. Also, we can try to
merge the contain of Citizendium into Wikipedia.

Interested people can download the current versions (not the complete
history : () of the articles here.[3] The bz2 is ok, but I can't unpack the
gzip one (correupted or not really a gzip file?).

Also, I'm downloading every single image from Citizendium, about 8000, and
their description pages which contain the license and uploader info.

Regards,
emijrp

[1]
http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Wikisource:Scriptorium&diff=prev&oldid=2014056
[2] http://toolserver.org/~emijrp/wikipediaarchive/#gne
[3] http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Downloads

2010/11/12 John Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com>

> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 9:03 PM, Tomasz Ganicz <polimerek@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > 2010/11/12 John Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com>:
> >> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 8:13 PM, Gerard Meijssen
> >> <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Hoi,
> >>> Providing help to an organisation that can be considered part of the
> >>> Wikimedia movement makes sense. The issue with Citizendium is that they
> >>> explicitly distance themselves from many of the basic corner stones of
> what
> >>> has made Wikipedia what it is.
> >>
> >> Which cornerstone is that?
> >>
> >
> > I think the most serious problem with them is that they do not follow
> > NPOV. Instead they follow a kind of biased-sympathetic-expert-POV.
>
> Is that systematic, symptomatic or merely evidenced in a small set of
> articles?
>
> I've seen lots of people point out specific problems with their
> content, but we have many problem articles too.
>
> > Anyway, I think it is worth helping Citzendium, but in a way to leave
> > their editorial policy freedom and clearly state, that they are not
> > going to be Wikimedia project, but they are a different approach,
> > interesting but not in line with some of our basic values such as
> > "anyone can edit on equal base" and "NPOV".
>
> I agree with everything except whether or not they are in line with
> our basic values. They may not align with Wikipedia's values, but as
> a separate project they dont need to be; instead they need to fit
> within the core values that all our projects have in common.
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Values
>
> --
> John Vandenberg
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 12/11/2010 07:40, Magnus Manske wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 8:56 AM, David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12 November 2010 07:56, geni <geniice@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> We should offer to host citizendium on our servers at no cost for a
>>> period of 1 (one) year offering a level of support equivalent to our
>>> smaller projects. After one year the citizendium community/Editorial
>>> Council is expected to have sorted themselves out to the point where
>>> they can arrange their own hosting. At which point we lock the
>>> database and provide them with the dumps
>>
>>
>> I strongly support this.
>
> +1

It seems a very good and healthy idea.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJM3RxMAAoJEHCAuDvx9Z6LIVkH/2xiNLlUackYRMixrmDJauBQ
SVo9zLt5JIBYZIk+iPLGiIgXaNxp0bTc/KTwSfGxxGoZKKzq1aXuFDvLU8hDJ006
BvNuovPQQx+rh56NJYUgZW/3A9M47YesogTaTfRxwhPZO2NmLrQnqhjGtfNTgMV9
DvyV7zhHdSWO1OiCzoFeJ+7SlCtnA3ikzjAarUdA3y3xglrfWZgY0wo4BDoLw43T
d87juvtA5+vfSPJo/eU3R/GT0n9niuXDJUFbeUqwhBsdfslfyON2+xVpNEYYwm1V
hVUbPCKLVzdDQ3N4Q0+q1wHLSKCUxHrv98erq7skbi/WhR8jlOx7z1WvQ6RsFWo=
=FdNd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
> Should we offer to host citizendium?
>

Sure, and not on a temporary basis either. Just don't put Larry back in
charge...

Of us, that is.

Fred


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
In business I have found that the most successful companies are those
that reach out, build relationships with, and where possible help
others that are compatible. So this makes very strong sense to me.

The main thing would be making sure it is clear in the media that we
do so as an educational charity, ie by grant or collaborative
agreement or whatever. So that it helps explain what we stand for
(most people know us as an encyclopedia, not even a volunteer
non-profit!). There is an issue of market positioning here, or
changing perception of a position, and it needs careful handling to
ensure it's communicated. A corporate making such a move publicly for
the first time would probably put out a press announcement or
conference to ensure there was enough attendance and attention that
its central points were properly heard. WMF could do worse than do
that too.

Some prime time coverage of WMF CEO: "As one of the worlds largest
volunteer educational charity movements in human numbers, we have
begun supporting other compatible movements in order to ensure a
healthy provision of many different sources of free information. Our
first (1/2/3) projects supported are (A/B/C)", would do the
job..........

FT2

On 11/12/10, Hans A. Rosbach <hans.a.rosbach@gmail.com> wrote:
> We have become the superpower, and that gives us a moral obligation to think
> beyond our own projects. Among the things we ought to be wary of is
> monoculture. If Wikipedia becomes the only source for encyclopaedic
> information, not only does that make the world poorer, but it makes our own
> projects poorer. Wikipedia needs the competition, if for no other reason
> than for strengthening ourselves.
>
> Hans A. Rosbach

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
On 12 November 2010 12:27, FT2 <ft2.wiki@gmail.com> wrote:

> Some prime time coverage of WMF CEO: "As one of the worlds largest
> volunteer educational charity movements in human numbers, we have
> begun supporting other compatible movements in order to ensure a
> healthy provision of many different sources of free information. Our
> first (1/2/3) projects supported are (A/B/C)", would do the
> job..........


Probably we should ask Danese first, she'd have to make sure we had
the techs and resources on hand for the hosting!

We're not Rackspace and we shouldn't be. We're not ibiblio, though
perhaps being that slightly would be good.

In any case, hosting projects that are actually in distress
(temporarily or more permanently) would be a good thing to do *if* we
have the technical capacity.


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
Hello,

I just cannot imagine that Larry Sanger could bear to see his beloved
Citizendium on a Wikimedia server, among all that child pornography he
is supposing there.

Kind regards
Ziko


2010/11/12 David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com>:
> On 12 November 2010 12:27, FT2 <ft2.wiki@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Some prime time coverage of WMF CEO: "As one of the worlds largest
>> volunteer educational charity movements in human numbers, we have
>> begun supporting other compatible movements in order to ensure a
>> healthy provision of many different sources of free information. Our
>> first (1/2/3) projects supported are (A/B/C)", would do the
>> job..........
>
>
> Probably we should ask Danese first, she'd have to make sure we had
> the techs and resources on hand for the hosting!
>
> We're not Rackspace and we shouldn't be. We're not ibiblio, though
> perhaps being that slightly would be good.
>
> In any case, hosting projects that are actually in distress
> (temporarily or more permanently) would be a good thing to do *if* we
> have the technical capacity.
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
Ziko van Dijk
Niederlande

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
On 12 November 2010 14:57, Ziko van Dijk <zvandijk@googlemail.com> wrote:

> I just cannot imagine that Larry Sanger could bear to see his beloved
> Citizendium on a Wikimedia server, among all that child pornography he
> is supposing there.


It's not his any more. (Part of their problem is that he micromanaged
it so closely no-one else knew just how dire its financial situation
was until just recently.) Though he still controls the domain name.
This is part of why establishing the ownership of the name is
important.


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
Point her to this thread? If it isn't needed this time it may be
salient not too far in future for other things.

FT2

On 11/12/10, David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com> wrote:
> Probably we should ask Danese first, she'd have to make sure we had
> the techs and resources on hand for the hosting!

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
In a message dated 11/12/2010 2:13:03 AM Pacific Standard Time,
jayvdb@gmail.com writes:


> I agree with everything except whether or not they are in line with
> our basic values. They may not align with Wikipedia's values, but as
> a separate project they dont need to be; instead they need to fit
> within the core values that all our projects have in common. >>
>
>

And they don't. As pointed out they have POV and also they are
credentialist. They do not invite the world to contribute, they effectively bar the
majority of the world from contributing.

They are not a meritocracy. They are instead an authoritarian oligarchy.
Of course the same criticism has been leveled at us, but then we don't
actually engrain it in our principle policies.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 2:56 AM, geni <geniice@gmail.com> wrote:
> Should we offer to host citizendium?

Nah, let them go to Wikia.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 10:35 AM, <WJhonson@aol.com> wrote:
> In a message dated 11/12/2010 2:13:03 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> jayvdb@gmail.com writes:
>
>
>> I agree with everything except whether or not they are in line with
>> our basic values.  They may not align with Wikipedia's values, but as
>> a separate project they dont need to be; instead they need to fit
>> within the core values that all our projects have in common. >>
>>
>>
>
> And they don't.  As pointed out they have POV and also they are
> credentialist.  They do not invite the world to contribute, they effectively bar the
> majority of the world from contributing.
>
> They are not a meritocracy.  They are instead an authoritarian oligarchy.
> Of course the same criticism has been leveled at us, but then we don't
> actually engrain it in our principle policies.

I'm one ocean late to this conversation, but I'll give a big +1
offering to host Citizendium.

They wouldn't be a WMF project, and so wouldn't need to adhere exactly
to all the core Wikimedia values. (And NPOV doesn't extend to all WMF
projects anyway.)

But read the Citizendium neutrality policy, if you haven't. The core
differences between their policies and ours are about the editing
process and project governance, not the kind of result they are
striving for: "we should fairly represent all sides of a dispute, and
not make an article state, imply, or insinuate that any one side is
correct." [1] That's not quite what NPOV says, but it's close enough
that we've already been able to incorporate a fair bit of CZ content
into Wikipedia. [2]

[1] = http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Neutrality_Policy

[2] = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Citizendium_Porting

-Sage

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
2010/11/12 John Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com>:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 9:03 PM, Tomasz Ganicz <polimerek@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2010/11/12 John Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com>:
>>> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 8:13 PM, Gerard Meijssen
>>> <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hoi,
>>>> Providing help to an organisation that can be considered part of the
>>>> Wikimedia movement makes sense. The issue with Citizendium is that they
>>>> explicitly distance themselves from many of the basic corner stones of what
>>>> has made Wikipedia what it is.
>>>
>>> Which cornerstone is that?
>>>
>>
>> I think the most serious problem with them is that they do not follow
>> NPOV. Instead they follow a kind of biased-sympathetic-expert-POV.
>
> Is that systematic, symptomatic or merely evidenced in a small set of articles?
>
> I've seen lots of people point out specific problems with their
> content, but we have many problem articles too.

Yes, of course But the difference is that we normally do not block
articles at the stage which was decieded by the expert to be perfect.
Homeopathy is their official "approved article". Anyway when I
randomly examined their approved artices they are in general OK. No
more biased than on average in Wikipedia. Cleaner and more consistent
the the ones in Wikipedia but usually no so detailed and having quite
often kind of summary at the end, which tends to be an "expert final
essay about the issue".



> I agree with everything except whether or not they are in line with
> our basic values.  They may not align with Wikipedia's values, but as
> a separate project they dont need to be; instead they need to fit
> within the core values that all our projects have in common.

So, if our core value is NPOV understood as being independent from
political or religous POV i think they are with some their fixations
which is the result of their editing mechanism, not due to their
general intention. In fact I can agree we have similar problems,
although IMHO there is more hope to solve them due to our opennes :-)

If our core value is to be open for editing by anyone - they claim
they are, but in fact they are rather not. We claim but in fact we
usually (not always, see the list of blocked articles or revised
versions) are :-)

With all other core values - i.e providing knowledge to all for free,
open licence policy, being independent from govermental/bussiness
influences - they perfectly fit with us.



--
Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
http://www.ptchem.lodz.pl/en/TomaszGanicz.html

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 10:12 AM, David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12 November 2010 14:57, Ziko van Dijk <zvandijk@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> I just cannot imagine that Larry Sanger could bear to see his beloved
>> Citizendium on a Wikimedia server, among all that child pornography he
>> is supposing there.
>
> It's not his any more. (Part of their problem is that he micromanaged
> it so closely no-one else knew just how dire its financial situation
> was until just recently.) Though he still controls the domain name.

What a mess. Citizendium was legally a project of the Tides Center,
but just recently this month the Tides Center "officially withdrew
direct financial support for the project" (according to Wikipedia).
Now someone set up a paypal account registered as
citizendium@hotmail.com and is now asking for donations directly,
rather than going through the Tides Center, but as far as I can tell
there still is no legal organization set up to receive the donations.

Does Sanger legally own the domain name, or is his name just listed as
the owner in the whois records? Does the Tides Center have a
trademark on citizendium.org, as it was, legally, their project? Why
did the Tides Center withdraw financial support? Where did all the
money go?

These are all questions which would have to be answered before WMF
should even consider getting involved. To cover itself legally it
should have the agreement of Larry Sanger, the Tides Center, and at
least a majority of the Management Counsel
(http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Management_Council).

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
An'n 12.11.2010 08:56, hett geni schreven:
> Should we offer to host citizendium?
Headlines of tomorrow: "Wikipedia buys out competitor. Chucked-out
Editor-in-Chief Larry Sanger says: They try to defend their de-facto
information monopoly before their challengers become too strong". Or
something like that. Okay, pure speculation. But I don't think it's a
good idea to host them. If we want to keep them for the innovative
effects of competition we should keep them organizationally separate
from Wikimedia.

If Wikimedians want to rescue them: donate money to them.

Marcus Buck
User:Slomox

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: Should we offer to host citizendium? [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Marcus Buck <me@marcusbuck.org> wrote:
> If Wikimedians want to rescue them: donate money to them.

"DN-PHP-6004: This organization's DonateNow service has been
temporarily disabled. Please contact this organization for other
donation options."
(https://secure.groundspring.org/dn/index.php?aid=15045)

If Wikimedians want to rescue them: teach them how to make a full history dump.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

1 2 3  View All