[Wikipedia-l] $6,000 goal reached!

Sun Oct 12 10:18:16 UTC 2003

On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 03:13:18PM +0800, Andrew Lih wrote:
> Perhaps I'm completely cynical, but the variety of suggestions about
> hiring experts to keep watch, or college professors, or
> "known-neutral-and-knowledgeable" folks is a bit troubling and un-Wiki.
> (And for those who know what I do for a living will find it ironic. :) 
> 
> If this route is considered, we should ensure no greater authority will
> be conferred upon this class of contributors.  So far, the suggestions
> by Delerium and Mav have been innocent enough, but could be dangerous if
> it becomes related to ownership, entitlement or keeper-status of certain
> topics.  

How about advertising in scientific magazines? But before we do that we
should make a survey what jobs and interests our readers have so we can
focus one advertising in a Wild-West-magazine somthing like
"Billy the Kid wanted! Write and article about him in the WP"
Ads should be 1) cheaper than experts and 2) reach more people.

> In the most extreme case, it reminds me of "The Simpsons" episode where
> the Mensa chapter of Springfield take responsibility for running the
> town (with their so-called "genius") only to have things go horribly
> wrong, and have Stephen Hawking come by to chastise them. :)

A great episode.

ciao, tom
-- 
http://www.tomk32.de - just a geek trying to change the world
   -.-       http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:TomK32
   /|>	        Urlaub? http://www.tomk32.de/fewo-koll/
   / \              http://tomk32.bookcrossing.com