Thomas R. Koll wrote:
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.
Advertising for expert volunteers in places where they might hang out
seems like a much better use of limited funds than paying for experts --
I think we have not even begun to tap the true range of potential expert
volunteers out there who are willing to contribute for the love of it.
Places to advertise:
* scientific journals (Nature ...)
* medical journals (NEJM, JAMA, The Lancet)
* popular science magazines (New Scientist, Scientific American)
* engineering journals (IEEE Spectrum ...)
* specialist games magazines, music magazines ...
* etc.
-- Neil