1 |
Ben de Groot <yngwin@g.o> posted 491988F5.9010206@g.o, |
2 |
excerpted below, on Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:30:29 +0100: |
3 |
|
4 |
> Josh Saddler wrote: |
5 |
>> |
6 |
>> Nope. The gentoo-wiki.com owner has already stated on the forums that |
7 |
>> he doesn't see a need for it to be hosted on our infrastructure. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> Did he do that after the recent debacle? I think he would be more |
10 |
> interested now. (Yes, people can change their mind...) |
11 |
|
12 |
I'm wondering on that too. Events sometimes have a way of changing |
13 |
someone's mind, and if that could happen, I'd think it would have at this. |
14 |
|
15 |
The one remaining issue I could see him being concerned about would be |
16 |
that "government by committee" would ruin its effectiveness, and that |
17 |
content wars and the like would eventually turn it into a hopeless mess |
18 |
as a result. I think it's worth noting who already has quite some |
19 |
experience in the area -- he does -- and NOT taking it out of his hands |
20 |
if we do decide to host it. Perhaps some adjustment, but he had a useful |
21 |
thing going, why not let him continue with it. (More after the points |
22 |
below.) |
23 |
|
24 |
> I don't think it would be worthwhile to start a competing wiki and |
25 |
> divide the userbase. |
26 |
|
27 |
Decent point. |
28 |
|
29 |
>>> I am of the opinion that we should see the wiki more or less as we do |
30 |
>>> the forums. It is a place where users can contribute to the Gentoo |
31 |
>>> community. I would expect most of our users are internet-savvy enough |
32 |
>>> to understand the nature of a wiki as user-generated and user-editable |
33 |
>>> content, and therefore not being as reliable as say our official |
34 |
>>> documentation. |
35 |
>> |
36 |
>> Unfortunately, they do *not* understand this. Just look around the |
37 |
>> forums. Users are greatly surprised when wiki or forums tutorials break |
38 |
>> their boxes[.] If users see a wiki on gentoo.org, it seems more like |
39 |
>> it counts as "official, verified" information. |
40 |
|
41 |
> Well, then it is a case of educating the ignorant, I'd say. |
42 |
> |
43 |
>> And really, I don't know that I trust the users, given what |
44 |
>> gentoo-wiki.com has turned into. |
45 |
> |
46 |
>>> We could add a disclaimer to the footer along the lines of: this wiki |
47 |
>>> is open and free for everyone to edit, therefore Gentoo cannot |
48 |
>>> guarantee the accuracy of its content. |
49 |
>> |
50 |
>> That's shooting ourself in the foot right there. Personally, I don't |
51 |
>> see the point of a resource that cannot be verified nor vetted for |
52 |
>> correctness. In my view, documentation simply must be accurate, |
53 |
>> otherwise we are doing ourselves and our users a disservice. |
54 |
|
55 |
> So in essence you are against an open wiki, that can be freely edited by |
56 |
> users. In that case you're turning a wiki into just a different backend |
57 |
> for the official documentation project. |
58 |
|
59 |
Personally, I strongly support the open wiki idea in general and see no |
60 |
reason why it couldn't be on an official Gentoo domain even as such, but |
61 |
I believe there's more that can be done to mitigate possible problems. |
62 |
|
63 |
* That "shooting ourself in the foot" comment was, I intuitively thought, |
64 |
headed somewhere other than it went. What I would have suggested there |
65 |
would be a HEADER, not a FOOTER (thus, the footer suggestion is shooting |
66 |
ourselves in the "footer", was where I expected that to go :). Make it a |
67 |
single paragraph at the top of every page, demarced similar to the way |
68 |
IMPORTANT notes are demarced in the "official" docs, if necessary linking |
69 |
to a longer disclaimer page. |
70 |
|
71 |
* Something I've seen on both the xorg and wikipedia wikis is "locked |
72 |
pages". If a particular topic appears vital enough yet continually gets |
73 |
abuse that needs tended to, set it up as desired and lock it, with a |
74 |
pointer to the "talk" page or etc for further suggestions. Similarly, |
75 |
now dated info could be locked with an "outdated, here for historical |
76 |
purposes, see <link>" disclaimer. |
77 |
|
78 |
* Also quite effective on wikipedia are their various preformatted |
79 |
"original research", "written like a commercial" etc disclaimers, |
80 |
appropriately boxed and bolded so it's very difficult to miss them. The |
81 |
preceding point already mentioned a couple of uses for such Gentooised |
82 |
preformatted disclaimers, and there are surely others. |
83 |
|
84 |
Of course, the guy who was running the unofficial wiki will certainly |
85 |
have a lot of wisdom borne of hard experience in this area, and likely |
86 |
already has reasonable solutions of his own. It'd be nice to fit the |
87 |
preformatted elements into the existing Gentoo theme, but there may be |
88 |
limits on fitting that into his style, both page and admin. |
89 |
|
90 |
* The above confluence of interests does therefore suggest one possible |
91 |
general solution. Basically, set it up with a Gentoo frame, including |
92 |
that disclaimer header (or footer) I mentioned, on Gentoo hosting, but |
93 |
otherwise give him (and the users) reasonably wide latitude, with the |
94 |
agreement structured so Gentoo can do what's necessary to protect its |
95 |
interests legally, of course (DMCA, copyright and libel takedown and the |
96 |
like, for instance). Of course, cover dispute and termination as well. |
97 |
The simplest way to do this may be to make him staff, much like the |
98 |
global forum mods, but with both parties getting rights to the existing |
99 |
wiki content should there be a split, so neither could hold the other |
100 |
fully hostage. |
101 |
|
102 |
(Obligatory disclosure: I've very occasionally browsed the wiki as I |
103 |
came across google links or etc in the past, but it hasn't been regular |
104 |
by any means. However, I've certainly missed it lately as I recently got |
105 |
an Acer Aspire One, and a lot of the Google links to info (accurate or |
106 |
not) on Atom CFLAGS and the like are now dead, as they pointed to gentoo- |
107 |
wiki. =:^( I've ended up having to be satisfied with the Arch-Linux |
108 |
forum thread on it and the like, but even that points to gentoo-wiki! |
109 |
But I really haven't had time to do much with it yet anyway, so it hasn't |
110 |
been a big issue... yet. Still, it's a big hole in specifically Gentoo |
111 |
friendly info I'd otherwise have, and I've become acutely aware of how |
112 |
many non-Gentoo users depend on the "unofficial" gentoo-wiki, whatever |
113 |
problems it may or may not have with accuracy. We really do need either |
114 |
it or a replacement up with /reliable/ hosting.) |
115 |
|
116 |
-- |
117 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
118 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
119 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |