Re: Citizendium

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
53 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

WJhonson
So after the mention of Citizendium once again, I applied to join it.
The application page is extremely verbose.  So much so, that it's a  bit of
a turn-off.
 
All I wanted to do was sign up and tweak a few articles to see if the  
interface was better.
They make you create a 50-word biography.  What's the point of  that?  So I
used that space to bitch.  My application was  rejected.
 
I know Larry Sanger reads this.  Maybe he could respond.  "We  don't want
people who bitch".  Sometimes people bitch for the right  reasons.
 
What I would do, is make the Sign Up page be at the most "Choose a  
username, choose a password".  There's really not much point in making it  
extremely difficult to join a project.
 
Will Johnson
 
 
**************Feeling the pinch at the grocery store?  Make dinner for $10
or less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

Fred Bauder-2
> So after the mention of Citizendium once again, I applied to join it.
> The application page is extremely verbose.  So much so, that it's a  bit
> of
> a turn-off.
>
> All I wanted to do was sign up and tweak a few articles to see if the
> interface was better.
> They make you create a 50-word biography.  What's the point of  that?  So
> I
> used that space to bitch.  My application was  rejected.
>
> I know Larry Sanger reads this.  Maybe he could respond.  "We  don't want
> people who bitch".  Sometimes people bitch for the right  reasons.
>
> What I would do, is make the Sign Up page be at the most "Choose a
> username, choose a password".  There's really not much point in making it
> extremely difficult to join a project.
>
> Will Johnson

An effort is made to identify your expertise. My problem is that I'm not
particularly interested in writing articles on divorce law, and also,
although I have a Juris Doctor degree, that is not an actual professional
level degree from a legal perspective, there are higher professional
studies. Only a few words are required. A rather low test of your
patience.

Fred



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

WJhonson
There is a set of check boxes to identify the area in which you are
going to be writing.  There is no check box for "biography" which made
me hesitate, so I checked the box for history.

I don't need 50 words to state that my areas of expertise are in
history, biography and genealogy.  I can say that in ten at the most.

The response I was given back was not welcoming.  So apparently
Citizendium has no room for critics inside the system?  
Criticism-from-the-inside, to my mind, is one of the most useful
strengths that Wikipedia has embraced.



-----Original Message-----
From: Fred Bauder <[hidden email]>
To: English Wikipedia <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thu, 9 Apr 2009 7:00 pm
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Citizendium

> So after the mention of Citizendium once again, I applied to join it.
> The application page is extremely verbose.  So much so, that it's a  
bit
> of
> a turn-off.
>
> All I wanted to do was sign up and tweak a few articles to see if the
> interface was better.
> They make you create a 50-word biography.  What's the point of  that?
 So
> I
> used that space to bitch.  My application was  rejected.
>
> I know Larry Sanger reads this.  Maybe he could respond.  "We  don't
want
> people who bitch".  Sometimes people bitch for the right  reasons.
>
> What I would do, is make the Sign Up page be at the most "Choose a
> username, choose a password".  There's really not much point in
making it
> extremely difficult to join a project.
>
> Will Johnson

An effort is made to identify your expertise. My problem is that I'm not
particularly interested in writing articles on divorce law, and also,
although I have a Juris Doctor degree, that is not an actual
professional
level degree from a legal perspective, there are higher professional
studies. Only a few words are required. A rather low test of your
patience.

Fred



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

Chris Down-2
The thing with Citizendium is that I'm not particularly comfortable giving
out personal information to people that I don't even know enough to trust it
with. If one of these 'constables' decides it, they could have an outing
extravaganza -- and don't think it is an impossibility, either - they're not
all robots.

- Chris

On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 6:53 AM, <[hidden email]> wrote:

> There is a set of check boxes to identify the area in which you are
> going to be writing.  There is no check box for "biography" which made
> me hesitate, so I checked the box for history.
>
> I don't need 50 words to state that my areas of expertise are in
> history, biography and genealogy.  I can say that in ten at the most.
>
> The response I was given back was not welcoming.  So apparently
> Citizendium has no room for critics inside the system?
> Criticism-from-the-inside, to my mind, is one of the most useful
> strengths that Wikipedia has embraced.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fred Bauder <[hidden email]>
> To: English Wikipedia <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Thu, 9 Apr 2009 7:00 pm
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Citizendium
>
> > So after the mention of Citizendium once again, I applied to join it.
> > The application page is extremely verbose.  So much so, that it's a
> bit
> > of
> > a turn-off.
> >
> > All I wanted to do was sign up and tweak a few articles to see if the
> > interface was better.
> > They make you create a 50-word biography.  What's the point of  that?
>  So
> > I
> > used that space to bitch.  My application was  rejected.
> >
> > I know Larry Sanger reads this.  Maybe he could respond.  "We  don't
> want
> > people who bitch".  Sometimes people bitch for the right  reasons.
> >
> > What I would do, is make the Sign Up page be at the most "Choose a
> > username, choose a password".  There's really not much point in
> making it
> > extremely difficult to join a project.
> >
> > Will Johnson
>
> An effort is made to identify your expertise. My problem is that I'm not
> particularly interested in writing articles on divorce law, and also,
> although I have a Juris Doctor degree, that is not an actual
> professional
> level degree from a legal perspective, there are higher professional
> studies. Only a few words are required. A rather low test of your
> patience.
>
> Fred
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

WJhonson
I guess you're referring to the part where they ask for a CV.  But that
is only for "editors" not for "authors".

I really don't understand how Citizendium expects to get a following if
they are going to set the bar so high just to sign up for heaven's
sake.  Any expert that wants to work on an experts-only project can
just join the new Britannica can't they.

Knol already has ten times the number of articles, and it's much
younger.  What I see on Citizendium is pretty sparse.  I understand
that Citizendium is attempting to only allow qualified experts to
create articles but the sign up page only states "write a 50-word
biography".  It makes no reference to "prove to us that you're an
expert" or whatever.  It's not a friendly page at all.

The first thing they need to get is better marketing and customer
relations ;)


-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Down <[hidden email]>
To: English Wikipedia <[hidden email]>
Sent: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 3:33 am
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Citizendium

The thing with Citizendium is that I'm not particularly comfortable
giving
out personal information to people that I don't even know enough to
trust it
with. If one of these 'constables' decides it, they could have an outing
extravaganza -- and don't think it is an impossibility, either -
they're not
all robots.

- Chris

On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 6:53 AM, <[hidden email]> wrote:

> There is a set of check boxes to identify the area in which you are
> going to be writing.  There is no check box for "biography" which made
> me hesitate, so I checked the box for history.
>
> I don't need 50 words to state that my areas of expertise are in
> history, biography and genealogy.  I can say that in ten at the most.
>
> The response I was given back was not welcoming.  So apparently
> Citizendium has no room for critics inside the system?
> Criticism-from-the-inside, to my mind, is one of the most useful
> strengths that Wikipedia has embraced.
>
>




_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

Fred Bauder-2
In reply to this post by WJhonson
> There is a set of check boxes to identify the area in which you are
> going to be writing.  There is no check box for "biography" which made
> me hesitate, so I checked the box for history.
>
> I don't need 50 words to state that my areas of expertise are in
> history, biography and genealogy.  I can say that in ten at the most.
>
> The response I was given back was not welcoming.  So apparently
> Citizendium has no room for critics inside the system?
> Criticism-from-the-inside, to my mind, is one of the most useful
> strengths that Wikipedia has embraced.

Larry Sanger is critic in chief at Citizendium. I think he pretty much
fills up the slot. I edit there, a bit, and, as I focus on what I am
editing and am careful to defer to any expert, have never had serious
trouble. I did initially say some mildly critical things on my user page,
but removed them after Larry reminded me that he wished to maintain a
collegial atmosphere:

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=User:Fred_Bauder&diff=100027867&oldid=100027826

I think that is a great idea, even a profoundly productive vision. I did
get blocked at first due to making a couple of edits to the article
"pseudoscience" which raised the question of whether psychoanalysis might
be considered pseudoscience.

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Pseudoscience&diff=prev&oldid=100031226

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Pseudoscience&diff=next&oldid=100031226

This resulted in a block, but one which Larry relieved me from

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Fred_Bauder

I assume he spoke to the blocking administrator. There had been no
warning or discussion.

Since then I have done all right, as you can see from my contributions,
working mostly on the article Medical error

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

Which remains unfinished, but I believe will eventually have some merit.

When I work there I enjoy my work, but make no effort to play any role in
policy making, and, to be frank, have not really spent time thinking
about how Larry's vision might best be realized. You know, to use a
strange new formulation, it is what it is. If it is to succeed, first
class academics and professionals would have to contribute, something I
doubt is happening now, but I see edits to the article medical error
which seem to be made by physicians, here is one editor:

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Robert_Badgett

I could certainly respect that editor's input.

Here is other:

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Howard_C._Berkowitz#Who_am_I.3F

"I'm not a physician but simulate them on computers" (medical information
systems)

Another:

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Gareth_Leng

"I am Head of the School of Biomedical Sciences in the College of Medical
and Veterinary Sciences at the University of Edinburgh. I am a member of
the executive of Citizendium."

I'm glad I did this little exercise. Those three are a pretty good
editing crew, and two of them, at least, are certainly, "first class",
whatever that means.

I think, to actually try out Citizendium, you have to suspend your
upfront attitudes and immerse yourself in it; something I have not really
done in a though way, but enough that I can recommend giving it a fair
trial.

Fred Bauder




_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

WJhonson
In reply to this post by WJhonson
In a message dated 4/10/2009 6:03:29 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[hidden email] writes:


> So don't join.>>

----------
That's exactly my point isn't it?
How many in-bound links are there to Citizendium?
How many in-bound links are there to IMDb?
IMDb now allows *any* member of the public to create synopsis.
Brittanica now allows any member of the public to edit (under moderation),
just like we're proposing for the project.
If you're a good writer, people will read your material, and your edits
will be approved.

I think the world has passed Citizendium by.

Will Johnson




**************
Feeling the pinch at the grocery store?  Make dinner for $10
or less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

Sage Ross
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 2:43 PM,  <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Brittanica now allows any member of the public to edit (under moderation),

Have you tried to do this?  I tested it out shortly after the editing
interface went live, and found that while I could access the text and
make changes, I couldn't actually submit the changes without signing
up for a subscription (at least, a free trial subscription).  I think
the Britannica "editing by the public" move is more or less a gimmick
to drive subscriptions rather than an effort to seek reader edits.

-Sage (User:Ragesoss)

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

WJhonson
In reply to this post by WJhonson
In a message dated 4/10/2009 12:13:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[hidden email] writes:


> I couldn't actually submit the changes without signing
> up for a subscription (at least, a free trial subscription).  I think
> the Britannica "editing by the public" move is more or less a gimmick
> to drive subscriptions rather than an effort to seek reader edits.
>

---------------------------

You can get a free and apparently eternal subscription by *being* a content
publisher elsewhere.  If you have your own website (as I do), where you publish
your own material, you can submit that to Brittanica and they will approve
you for a free subscription.  My went a year, it's up for renewal now.  I
haven't renewed it yet.

I have used Brittanica for links, but they are almost becoming obsolete with
the appearance of Google Books, at least in my field.  Why link to modern
accumulator when you can link right back to an older, or perhaps even *the*
primary source for some piece of evidence?  So I'm a bit ambivalent on whether to
extend my subscription even though free.  I just find that I'm not using them.

In addition, a great deal of my recent work, has been on BLPs and Brittanica
just does not cover them to the depth that I need.  So generally I just
rewrite them using most primitive sources anyway.

Brittanica is great however for tangential or incidental links in articles
you are writing, but then so is Wikipedia, and I do like that I can make edits
directly to it, but then I can do that in Wikipedia.  Brittanica is supposed to
be written by experts, but I tend to find errors and omissions there that are
inexplicable.  Generally I find these on articles I worked myself in-depth.  
It makes me wonder about the experts.

I'm not sure if I like it enough to continue doing it.

Will Johnson




**************
Feeling the pinch at the grocery store?  Make dinner for $10 or
less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

orngjce223 .
In reply to this post by Sage Ross
Citizendium, I'd say, is backwards. A better drive would be to crib  
Wikipedia articles, improve them (outside the bounds of Wikipedia's  
processes, which means the replacement process can do whatever it likes) to  
FA status, and then replace them. That, I think, would work better than  
trying to duplicate work that's already been done hundreds of times before.  
I mean, I have nothing against Larry Sanger, but this is swinging the  
pendulum in the wrong direction.

~user:orngjce223 | how am I typing?
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

WJhonson
In reply to this post by WJhonson
In a message dated 4/10/2009 12:49:42 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[hidden email] writes:


> A better drive would be to crib  
> Wikipedia articles, improve them (outside the bounds of Wikipedia's  
> processes, which means the replacement process can do whatever it likes)
> to  
> FA status, and then replace them.>>

--------------------

If you mean replace them *outside* the project isn't that something that
Veropedia is supposed to be doing?

If you mean replace them back *in* the project, I seem to recall quite
vividly a multi-year battle was started over a certain editor (you know who you
are) doing exactly that.  Taking a very large article, working it over in
her own user-space, and then slapping it back in place.  *Some* of the other
editors working that article didn't take too kindly to that approach.

The fiasco that came out of that, is one of the reasons I don't edit in
project as much as I once did.  It's also *the* reason I no longer watch my
watchlist.  I just edit and move on, without looking back.

Will Johnson




**************
Feeling the pinch at the grocery store?  Make dinner for $10
or less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

Fred Bauder-2
In reply to this post by orngjce223 .
> Citizendium, I'd say, is backwards. A better drive would be to crib
> Wikipedia articles, improve them (outside the bounds of Wikipedia's
> processes, which means the replacement process can do whatever it likes)
> to
> FA status, and then replace them. That, I think, would work better than
> trying to duplicate work that's already been done hundreds of times
> before.
> I mean, I have nothing against Larry Sanger, but this is swinging the
> pendulum in the wrong direction.
>
> ~user:orngjce223 | how am I typing?

The problem with that is that people end up importing them (and the
template jungle) but often never improve them.

Fred



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

Anthony-73
In reply to this post by WJhonson
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 2:43 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote:

> In a message dated 4/10/2009 6:03:29 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> [hidden email] writes:
>
> So don't join.>>
>
> That's exactly my point isn't it?


If you say it is, then I guess it is.

But not everyone is unwilling to write 50 words about themselves in order to
join Citizendium.  I did it (http://tinyurl.com/cjo5hc), though I no longer
contribute due to other concerns (the main concern being one that Wikipedia
will soon be no better with regard to - lack of respect for copyright).

By the way, to answer your question "what's the point of that", the point is
to create a project where people contribute under their real names and
identities.

How many in-bound links are there to Citizendium?
> How many in-bound links are there to IMDb?
> IMDb now allows *any* member of the public to create synopsis.
> Brittanica now allows any member of the public to edit (under moderation),
> just like we're proposing for the project.
> If you're a good writer, people will read your material, and your edits
> will be approved.


Some people have goals other than to have their material read by as many
people as possible.  Some, for instance, would prefer that their works not
be edited mercilessly by any anonymous moron who comes along.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

WJhonson
-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]; English Wikipedia <[hidden email]>
Sent: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 6:19 pm
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Citizendium

But not everyone is unwilling to write 50 words about themselves in
order to join Citizendium.  I did it (http://tinyurl.com/cjo5hc),
though I no longer contribute due to other concerns (the main concern
being one that Wikipedia will soon be no better with regard to - lack
of respect for copyright).

By the way, to answer your question "what's the point of that", the
point is to create a project where people contribute under their real
names and identities.
------------------------

On the first part, the page does not state that you must do this *in
order* to join, it merely asks you to do this.  Many sites ask you to
describe yourself.  This is the first one I've encountered, out of many
programs I've joined, that tries to *compel* you to do so, and if you
don't you can't join.  That's quite different.  If Citizendium wants to
compel people to describe themselves, they should state it clearly on
the page that if you don't, they will reject you.  But they don't state
that.

On your second point, the biography has nothing to do with your real
name.  The real name field is another separate field, not within the
biographical detail box.

Will Johnson




_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

Chris Down-2
In reply to this post by WJhonson
Actually, I was just talking about verification of identity.

- Chris

On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 12:25 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I guess you're referring to the part where they ask for a CV.  But that
> is only for "editors" not for "authors".
>
> I really don't understand how Citizendium expects to get a following if
> they are going to set the bar so high just to sign up for heaven's
> sake.  Any expert that wants to work on an experts-only project can
> just join the new Britannica can't they.
>
> Knol already has ten times the number of articles, and it's much
> younger.  What I see on Citizendium is pretty sparse.  I understand
> that Citizendium is attempting to only allow qualified experts to
> create articles but the sign up page only states "write a 50-word
> biography".  It makes no reference to "prove to us that you're an
> expert" or whatever.  It's not a friendly page at all.
>
> The first thing they need to get is better marketing and customer
> relations ;)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Down <[hidden email]>
> To: English Wikipedia <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 3:33 am
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Citizendium
>
> The thing with Citizendium is that I'm not particularly comfortable
> giving
> out personal information to people that I don't even know enough to
> trust it
> with. If one of these 'constables' decides it, they could have an outing
> extravaganza -- and don't think it is an impossibility, either -
> they're not
> all robots.
>
> - Chris
>
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 6:53 AM, <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > There is a set of check boxes to identify the area in which you are
> > going to be writing.  There is no check box for "biography" which made
> > me hesitate, so I checked the box for history.
> >
> > I don't need 50 words to state that my areas of expertise are in
> > history, biography and genealogy.  I can say that in ten at the most.
> >
> > The response I was given back was not welcoming.  So apparently
> > Citizendium has no room for critics inside the system?
> > Criticism-from-the-inside, to my mind, is one of the most useful
> > strengths that Wikipedia has embraced.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

WJhonson
Well still the verification of identity really doesn't have anything to
do with "type a 50-word biography"

When I signed up for Knol, one thing they did was allow verification.  
So one way to verify you was that you gave them a phone number and your
name as it was listed in the phone book.  They check that it's really
there, they CALL you and give you a code.  You have to type that code
back in.

So what that verifies is that whoever answered the phone at that number
was the same person who asked them to call that name and number (listed
in the phone book) in the first place.  I'd call that *fairly good*
verification.  Not perfect, but at least it pins the typist down to a
particular phone number and phone book listing.

At any rate, I don't see how a 50-word biography which could be
anything I choose to make up, would satisfy any kind of identify
verification.  To be an *Editor* that ask that you submit a CV which I
suppose if you were so inclined you could check against some college
database or whatever.

BUT to be an Author they do not ask you to submit a CV.  Just
apparently this mini-biography.

So the point is still the same.  If they are using this to verify
something, that's not any sort of verification at all.

Will Johnson





_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

Anthony-73
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 5:05 AM, <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Well still the verification of identity really doesn't have anything to
> do with "type a 50-word biography"
>

"Will Johnson" does not identify a person.  "Will Johnson, the guy who went
to X college and works in Y industry, and likes hobbies A, B, and Z" does.

That's not the only reason they ask for a biography, but it is an added
benefit.  It brings Citizendium into the real world.

When I signed up for Knol, one thing they did was allow verification.
> So one way to verify you was that you gave them a phone number and your
> name as it was listed in the phone book.  They check that it's really
> there, they CALL you and give you a code.  You have to type that code
> back in.


I tried that for several weeks and it was always broken.  I tried it with
several different phone numbers, and several different credit card numbers.
Never worked.

Besides, it costs money.

At any rate, I don't see how a 50-word biography which could be
> anything I choose to make up, would satisfy any kind of identify
> verification.


There's an assumption of good faith, I assume, but at least you're
committing to an identity which could be further checked out later, if
doubts arise as to your sincerity.  It's a great example of soft security,
in my opinion.

I don't know.  It's been a while since I've signed up to Citizendium.  Maybe
they've significantly changed the process since then.


> To be an *Editor* that ask that you submit a CV which I
> suppose if you were so inclined you could check against some college
> database or whatever.
>

Yeah well, that's a whole different process.


> BUT to be an Author they do not ask you to submit a CV.  Just
> apparently this mini-biography.
>
> So the point is still the same.  If they are using this to verify
> something, that's not any sort of verification at all.


What if they're not using it to verify anything, but just to keep out people
like you?

C'mon, haven't you ever gone to a meeting and been asked to stand up and
tell everyone a little bit about yourself?  Did you object and use that
platform to bitch about the system?  Maybe you did...
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

Sage Ross
In reply to this post by WJhonson
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 5:05 AM,  <[hidden email]> wrote:

> When I signed up for Knol, one thing they did was allow verification.
> So one way to verify you was that you gave them a phone number and your
> name as it was listed in the phone book.  They check that it's really
> there, they CALL you and give you a code.  You have to type that code
> back in.
>
> So what that verifies is that whoever answered the phone at that number
> was the same person who asked them to call that name and number (listed
> in the phone book) in the first place.  I'd call that *fairly good*
> verification.  Not perfect, but at least it pins the typist down to a
> particular phone number and phone book listing.
>
> At any rate, I don't see how a 50-word biography which could be
> anything I choose to make up, would satisfy any kind of identify
> verification.  To be an *Editor* that ask that you submit a CV which I
> suppose if you were so inclined you could check against some college
> database or whatever.
>

They've had some discussion on the CZ forum about the onerousness of
the sign-up process before, and in addition to rejections, they have
quite a few where they basically write back, "we need more
information, because we don't have enough to verify your identity".
Most of those people never get back to them, from what I gather.

CZ sign-up is slightly problematic for people without institutional
email addresses, but they place a high premium on better verification
than just 'fairly good'.  In part, I think this is because they
really, really want to avoid letting any vandals through; the lack of
that particular aspect of Wikipedia is a major selling point for many
of their users and potential users.

A related observation: presumably because of the delayed sign-up
process, only about half of new users ever make a first edit on CZ:
http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Image:New_users.png

-Sage
(User:Ragesoss)

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

Doc glasgow
Sage Ross wrote:
>
> A related observation: presumably because of the delayed sign-up
> process, only about half of new users ever make a first edit on CZ:
> http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Image:New_users.png
>
> -Sage
> (User:Ragesoss)
>

I wonder what percentage of new accounts make a *useful* first edit on
wikipedia?



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Citizendium

Sage Ross
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 11:10 AM, doc <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Sage Ross wrote:
>>
>> A related observation: presumably because of the delayed sign-up
>> process, only about half of new users ever make a first edit on CZ:
>> http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Image:New_users.png
>>
>> -Sage
>> (User:Ragesoss)
>>
>
> I wonder what percentage of new accounts make a *useful* first edit on
> wikipedia?
>

Smaller, no doubt, than on CZ.  But their registration process has
already imposed a moderately intense selection process; most people
who successfully register are people whose edits are very likely to be
useful, so they view the fact many of them never begin editing as
serious loss.  And, of course, at this stage they are much more
concerned with getting new people involved than we are (which is,
perhaps, shortsighted on our part, but it's tough to see participation
levels as a critical problem when the scale of the user base is so big
that we can't get a real sense of it on an interpersonal level)

-Sage
(User:Rageoss)

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
123