Wikitribune - the next great Wales failure

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:46 pm

I can't quite remember exactly where, but I know someone at Wikitribune mentioned that they were targeting "September" as the website launch date for the project. It's October now. Still no Wikitribune. Consider the first major target missed, I guess.

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Mon Oct 02, 2017 12:55 pm

thekohser wrote:I can't quite remember exactly where, but I know someone at Wikitribune mentioned that they were targeting "September" as the website launch date for the project. It's October now. Still no Wikitribune. Consider the first major target missed, I guess.

He will PROBABLY have to produce a product at some point. It is only a matter of time before the fish figure out the intentions of the fisherman...

Fixed.

The big cynic in me predicts a December 1 launch so he can cash in on the end of year charitable donations frenzy with a fresh product and the excitement of new consumers, who will be too slow to realize that he won't be able to sustain whatever launch they make with their joke of a skeleton newsorg staff...

RfB

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Mon Oct 02, 2017 3:29 pm

I've been thinking about that. It can't be hard to fake up some news stories by pirating existing news sites and articles from Wikipedia that amount to news stories. A little time and ingenuity will be needed to avoid it looking as if they've just cut and pasted others' work, but maybe less than you'd think. And they can pad it out with photos from Commons and maybe text from Wikipedia giving "background".

Kingsindian · Unread post by **Kingsindian** » Mon Oct 02, 2017 3:54 pm

This article on the Medium page says:

Next week, WikiTribune journalist Lydia Morrish will be interviewing Peter Kosminsky, who created the four-part Channel 4 drama ‘The State.’ Based on his own extensive research, it dramatised the journey made by young British Muslims heading to Syria to join Isis.

The interview will focus on the intersection of journalism and drama, and will take place on the 4th of October.
Since this is WikiTribune, we’d like your input. Send your questions for Kosminsky directly to Lydia over email or Twitter, or put them in the comments on this post. She’ll only have a limited time with Peter, but will consider all questions for inclusion.

We’ll be publishing the interview on our beta site and also here on the blog.

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Mon Oct 02, 2017 4:04 pm

Fighting Fake News™® in the trenches with one-on-one interviews with screenwriters, published to blogs.

Nice.

RfB

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Mon Oct 02, 2017 4:49 pm

Kingsindian wrote:This article on the Medium page says:

Since this is WikiTribune, we’d like your input. Send your questions for Kosminsky directly to Lydia over email or Twitter, or put them in the comments on this post.

At least three days later, the Medium comments field should be jam-packed full of potential questions from the crowd. But there are zero, in fact (other than one from some user named Wikipediocracy).

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:32 pm

thekohser wrote:some user named Wikipediocracy

A troll! Block!!

Graaf Statler · Unread post by **Graaf Statler** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 1:18 pm

Poetlister wrote:I've been thinking about that. It can't be hard to fake up some news stories by pirating existing news sites and articles from Wikipedia that amount to news stories. A little time and ingenuity will be needed to avoid it looking as if they've just cut and pasted others' work, but maybe less than you'd think. And they can pad it out with photos from Commons and maybe text from Wikipedia giving "background".

So, you mean a project like this. it has all the elements you mentioned. Copy past from news sites, a bit Wikipedia, photo's from Commons. And you may use news story's, a exception in our quotation law. Briljant format!

The only small problem is, those news story's remain protected under our copyright law. You may use them, but you don't one the copyright. So, it's impossible to give the content free under that CC BY 2.5 license like Wikinieuws is using. Or any other licence. Because there Terms of Use can't overrule the Dutch copyright law, and the CC license is not a "supra-static" approved license, so it has no value in Europe! In other words, a ocean has at two sites a coasts, and you can't give away what is not yours on the other site of that ocean!

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 3:39 pm

Yes, Wikinews is available in many languages. But I'd be surprised if these copyright arguments apply in the USA, and Jimbo will neither know nor care about international copyright law unless and until there is a court case.

Graaf Statler · Unread post by **Graaf Statler** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 10:23 pm

Wikinews is a failed project and I think nobody cares about copyvio on Wikinews. But, if you start a "professional" project like Wikitribune with the Wikinews system, you don't have to wait very long before some newspaper starts a court case. Because I don't think they accept there work is given away for free by Jimmy's new Wikitribune.
And about Jimmy, you are right. Jimmy has no idea of international copyright law. But is there anything were Jimmy has a idea of? And does he ever care about anything?

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Wed Oct 04, 2017 7:41 pm

Graaf Statler wrote:And does he ever care about anything?

Certainly. He cares about Jimmy Wales.

Graaf Statler · Unread post by **Graaf Statler** » Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:17 pm

I am still wondering how Jimmy wants to create his Wikitribune product. I mean in a legal way.
Because that CC license is only usable on international level if you are 100% the owner of a work. And neither with Fair use nor with the European quotation law are you the owner, it remain copyright protected material. And I found out the American Fair use has many limitations, much more that the Wikipedians are suggesting. And many European country's doesn't even have fair use. Were does he want to find in legal way the material to give for free away? You can't simpel not give something away what is not yours!
I have the feeling nobody ever thought of this problem with that CC license.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Thu Oct 05, 2017 2:45 am

Graaf, I have the feeling that you don't understand how creating of content and licensing really work. You've said you're a farmer, right? With all due respect for your honorable profession, I would just get back to your farming and not worry about the license that Wikitribune ultimately adopts... if it ever actually launches. (It's starting to feel more and more like the Wikia Search project... dead on arrival.)

Graaf Statler · Unread post by **Graaf Statler** » Thu Oct 05, 2017 6:59 am

At one point you and this farmer agree, probably/almost for sure Wikitribune will never be launched because it's a insane concept. It will never work, so, it's all theory. And this is not my theory, Whaledad, absolute not a farmer, informed by Dutch legal experts about this matter, you could read it in the link I gave you before. And they told him this is right. But in one thing you are right, farming is a very honorable profession. But never, never make the mistake to think professor are alway's clever, and farmers always stupid! You can not give away what is not yours! Even a farmer understands that!

Graaf Statler · Unread post by **Graaf Statler** » Thu Oct 05, 2017 8:11 am

Here, the link about our request to WMF and Wikimedia-NL about this matter.
(Robot, 30) And do you know what the answer of WMF was? A global lock and block!

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Thu Oct 05, 2017 3:37 pm

Graaf Statler wrote: At one point you and this farmer agree, probably/almost for sure Wikitribune will never be launched because it's a insane concept. It will never work, so, it's all theory. And this is not my theory, Whaledad, absolute not a farmer, informed by Dutch legal experts about this matter, you could read it in the link I gave you before. And they told him this is right. But in one thing you are right, farming is a very honorable profession. But never, never make the mistake to think professor are alway's clever, and farmers always stupid! You can not give away what is not yours! Even a farmer understands that!

First off, don't let anybody ever denigrate your ideas because of your occupation.

That said....

I don't really agree that "Wikitribune will never be launched because it's a insane concept" because they never really have decided what WikiTribune is. It depends what the definition of is is, in other words... (Hmmm, I've heard that line somewhere...)

Oh, it's "Against Fake News." JW was precise in his timing in cashing in on that buzzword of the day when it was hot stuff. Yep, against fake news, that's what they are. "Please give us money!!!" — that's another fundamental slogan that is not going away ever.

Beyond that, they're working on it because they really, really want to get it right, and they've hired a staff of fresh, young faces — THE JOURNALISTS!!! Oh, my god, how can this possibly fail if you are (1) against fake news; and (2) are working hard on it to really, really get it right; and (3) employing JOURNALISTS? It just can't. Now hurry up and please give them more money, because that, after all, is the entire point of the operation: JW saw The Guardian raking in the dosh from donors and he wants some. Money is good, very, very good.

Is it a news organization? Comically underfunded and woefully understaffed for that. Is it a news wiki? Good luck beating Wikipedia, no matter the fact that WIKITribune is clearly named to maximize confusion to steer just a couple of those WMF millions into the pocket of The Founder. What's wiki about it? Wow, how are you gonna avoid FAKE NEWS on a Wiki? Betcha never thought of that, didja, dumb asses...

Well, is it a blog? So far that is what it looks like... A Wiki Blog Against Fake News Please Give Us Money. Hmmmmm, that's not a very good concept. The interviews are lame, the writing sophomoric (in a literal, second year of university sense), and, gosh, did we forget to mention Please Give Us Money.

It's actually going to be interesting to see how JW pulls his foot out of this bucket that he has stepped into... But he will do it by December 1, mark my words, because that's when the donors start writing checks and that is what this is all about.

RfB

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:18 pm

Randy from Boise wrote:I don't really agree that "Wikitribune will never be launched because it's a insane concept" because they never really have decided what WikiTribune is. It depends what the definition of is is, in other words... (Hmmm, I've heard that line somewhere...)

Unless they can decide what it is, it will certainly never get off the ground. If Jimbo were proceeding logically, he'd have specified his project very carefully at an early stage. Is his failure to do so incompetence or a clever move? We may never know!

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:16 pm

Poetlister wrote:
Randy from Boise wrote:I don't really agree that "Wikitribune will never be launched because it's a insane concept" because they never really have decided what WikiTribune is. It depends what the definition of is is, in other words... (Hmmm, I've heard that line somewhere...)
Unless they can decide what it is, it will certainly never get off the ground. If Jimbo were proceeding logically, he'd have specified his project very carefully at an early stage. Is his failure to do so incompetence or a clever move? We may never know!

Occam's razor (T-H-L)

RfB

Graaf Statler · Unread post by **Graaf Statler** » Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:55 pm

Randy from Boise wrote: I don't really agree that "Wikitribune will never be launched because it's a insane concept" because they never really have decided what WikiTribune is.

And here we are again, they don't have a product. And without a product you can't sell anything, they have nothing what is unique to offer.
But after your very moderated post on the talkpage of Jimmy, I was thinking, it is a drama for him. Whether you like it or not, Wikipedia is a succes, and the money is flows in. And also I gives Jimmy the credits he did a good PR job. But.....from all that millions what are flowing in he gets almost nothing, and all his other projects fail. That must be frustrating, because we all know that Wikitribune is a failed project before it even has started. Maybe WMF can give him 100K a year if he promise only to do PR work, so they can do a massive clean up in there staff.

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Fri Oct 06, 2017 8:24 pm

Graaf Statler wrote:Maybe WMF can give him 100K a year if he promise only to do PR work, so they can do a massive clean up in there staff.

He'd never believe that he's only worth that much. He was getting far more as Chairman of TPO, and no doubt he thought that he was worth it.

Graaf Statler · Unread post by **Graaf Statler** » Fri Oct 06, 2017 9:26 pm

Poetlister wrote:
Graaf Statler wrote:Maybe WMF can give him 100K a year if he promise only to do PR work, so they can do a massive clean up in there staff.
He'd never believe that he's only worth that much. He was getting far more as Chairman of TPO, and no doubt he thought that he was worth it.

Self-estimation. And what happend to TPO and that 20 million? It evaporated. And that Wikitribune? It will never be a succes, because they can't figure out a product. And Wikipedia? It is a pity this interview with Jimmy is in Dutch. In brief, Jimmy calls Wikipedia old fashioned and fossilized. That is correct. And, he writes: Mislukken, daar ben ik goed in. (Fail, I'm good at.) Also right. And when you read one, (robot?) you understand Jimmy has no idea what the real problems of Wikipedia are. So, he is solving a problem of something he doesn't understand, and because of that he is ....failing! Conclution: Jimmy is doing where he is very good in at the moment, failing.
And if WMF does't understand Jimmy is making a chaos at the moment of WMF/Wikimedia/pedia, they will fail too! So if they are wise they give him 200K to get lost.

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Sat Oct 07, 2017 11:59 am

This is quite a fun article. Graaf: please correct me if I have mistranslated. Quotes indicate Jimbo's actual words; the rest are from the interviewer.

Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales compares his mental child with sausage. Sausage? "It tastes good, but you do not want to know how it is made."

Any change will be checked.

"We have a surplus of male nerdy geeks," said Wales about the Wikipedia community. A community that doubts whether Kate Middleton's wedding dress deserves an article (yes) but effortlessly devotes hundreds of articles to obscure Linux distributions.

[Hands up who thinks a wedding dress deserves an article?]

He speaks softly and quietly, showing less self-esteem than the average top man of a tech company. He is a widely requested speaker and internet advocate and entrepreneur.

"It was a year and a half too early to introduce a visual editor, software that makes writing a lot easier. We did not test that well and it was not a glorious moment."

Kingsindian · Unread post by **Kingsindian** » Sat Oct 07, 2017 12:14 pm

Jimbo has been telling that "wedding gown" story for a long time. Here is a Slate article in 2012. I don't know when the linked interview took place.

Also Wedding dress of Kate Middleton (T-H-L) does have an article, so I don't know what he's talking about. Perhaps the fact that it was put up for an AfD, which was overwhelmingly "keep"?

What's funny about the AfD is that the nominator pointed to two hypothetical (at the time non-existent) articles about Wedding dress of Lady Diana Spencer (T-H-L) and Wedding dress of Princess Elizabeth (T-H-L) as an argument for deletion. Dr Blofeld immediately created both of them and they still exist.

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Sat Oct 07, 2017 1:19 pm

Kingsindian wrote:I don't know when the linked interview took place.

2nd December 2015.

Graaf Statler · Unread post by **Graaf Statler** » Sat Oct 07, 2017 4:07 pm

Poetlister wrote:
Kingsindian wrote:I don't know when the linked interview took place.
2nd December 2015.

That is correct. Jimmy was at that time in Holland for that pretension Erasmus Price for his sausage. And you know, only the butcher and god knows what is in a sausage, and that is Jimmy's philosophy of Wikipedia. Doesn't matter what is in that sausage, rat, mouse, rotten fish, doesn't matter, as long as it's taste good it's ok.

The only strange thing is the discrepancy between the vision of the "founder" of Wikipedia, and WMF and it's director. Because Jimmy discribes his sausage as a old fashion, fossilized product were only god knows what is in, (There is not butcher) and WMF and it's director as the norm for fact checking and the standard of science and education in 2030 according to that strategy discussion. The only conclusion can be, Jimmy wants to change the whole world in one big sausage in 2030. But don't worry, it taste good!

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Sun Oct 08, 2017 10:16 am

Graaf Statler wrote:The only strange thing is the discrepancy between the vision of the "founder" of Wikipedia, and WMF and it's director. Because Jimmy discribes his sausage as a old fashion, fossilized product were only god knows what is in, (There is not butcher) and WMF and it's director as the norm for fact checking and the standard of science and education in 2030 according to that strategy discussion. The only conclusion can be, Jimmy wants to change the whole world in one big sausage in 2030. But don't worry, it taste good!

You can resolve that discrepancy. Jimbo accepts that at present there is a lot wrong with Wikipedia. That is indeed official Wikipedia policy; it is accepted thst there is no systematic fact checking and one Wikipedia article is not a reliable source that can be used in another article. However, Jimbo may assume that a troop of good fairies will come along in a few years and sort out everything.

Graaf Statler · Unread post by **Graaf Statler** » Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:23 am

Impossible. Whaledad and I spend five years to clean up the micro project Wikiquote-NL. Fifteen hundred quotes, and half way I am trolled out by Wikipedia-NL users, international stewards from Meta, and last but not least by Jimmy's Safety and Trust department because I was a danger for the mental health of the Wikipedians. On with which I fully agree, because psychiatric problems can increase dramatically when things changes.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:38 pm

Wikipedia's article about Wikitribune (T-H-L) makes no mention of Orit Kopel, but the reliable source Business Insider identifies her as the cofounder of the project. Why is Wikipedia not keeping up with this facet of the sum of human knowledge?

By the way, Jimbo has fallen 9 spots on BI's list of the hundred "coolest people" in UK technology.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:45 pm

For those of you worrying about how long it's taking to launch the Wikitribune website, don't worry -- "SLOW JOURNALISM" is all part of their plan:

Kingsindian · Unread post by **Kingsindian** » Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:46 pm

Is Orit Kopel really a co-founder? I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere else.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:49 pm

Kingsindian wrote:Is Orit Kopel really a co-founder? I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere else.

Try this.

Also mentioned here a few months ago.

Kingsindian · Unread post by **Kingsindian** » Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:50 pm

"Minimum Viable Journalism" sounds like a meaningless buzzword. What does it even mean? I suppose it is a play on "Minimum Viable Product", but how it actually applies to journalism is a bit foggy.

Kingsindian · Unread post by **Kingsindian** » Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:54 pm

thekohser wrote:
Kingsindian wrote:Is Orit Kopel really a co-founder? I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere else.
Try this.

Ok, sorry for being unclear. What I meant was that this is not the way WikiTribune is described generally. It's usually just Jimbo who is mentioned in the media. Perhaps Orit Kopel likes it that way? I am not sure what to make of it.

No Ledge · Unread post by **No Ledge** » Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:12 pm

I see

dancing in my head

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:22 pm

Kingsindian wrote:Ok, sorry for being unclear. What I meant was that this is not the way WikiTribune is described generally. It's usually just Jimbo who is mentioned in the media. Perhaps Orit Kopel likes it that way? I am not sure what to make of it.

Jimbo insisting on being called the Sole Founder of a project and sidelining a key collaborator? Who has ever heard of such a thing?

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Mon Oct 09, 2017 4:13 pm

With barely 6 weeks until the witching hour, all we've got is a blog and a scratch paper doodle.

SLOW JOURNALISM APPROACH seems to mean actually doing original research and writing to produce long form content.

MINIMUM VIABLE JOURNALISM seems to be a catchy rationale for doing a lame job sketching out the basics and calling it good, which directly contradicts the above.

WE WILL KEEP COMMENTS hardly revolutionizes the world and will create its own heaping helping of headaches.

The rest of it is idiotic drivel that only indicates they are farther behind the curve than they should be.

RfB

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:45 pm

Remember, ENGAGEMENT IS THE #NO1 METRIC...

For those reading aloud, that's the Number Number One metric.

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:46 pm

thekohser wrote:Remember, ENGAGEMENT IS THE #NO1 METRIC...

For those reading aloud, that's the Number Number One metric.

That is of course straight out of the Wikipedia playbook. Number of edits is the most important thing.

Soldado Sin Nombre · Unread post by **Soldado Sin Nombre** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:28 am

"For those of you worrying about how long it's taking to launch the Wikitribune website, don't worry -- "SLOW JOURNALISM" is all part of their plan:

Well, Jimbo says the news is "broken" (just as search was broken?) and Wikitribune's mission is to fix it. Implied in the word "news" is coverage of current events, right? Also implied in this is a fast, not slow turnover time of the news cycle, right? So how does the concept of slow fit into this? It's like trying to combine the McDonald's drive-through with Ruth's Chris Steakhouse. You don't get a porterhouse at the drive-through, right?

So, is Wikitribune then a current events magazine? If so, then fine, there are plenty of those in the world, but the wiki model would work for a magazine, who knows. However, if it's a magazine, then why don't they just say so?

Then again, Jimbo is someone who coifs champagne with heads of state, and I'm just a guy with an internet connection and a lot of opinions, so it's I who doesn't get it,.........

Right?

No Ledge · Unread post by **No Ledge** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 1:16 am

If you define "fast journalism" (i.e. reporting news on the same day it breaks, you know, the way Wikipedia reports a lot of news) as Fast publication of [b]unverified information[/b], then yeah, you want reporters to slow down long enough to verify.

Thus, I'd expect the 'tribune to report a lot of news after the 'pedia has already reported it.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:20 am

Soldado Sin Nombre wrote:Then again, Jimbo is someone who coifs champagne with heads of state...

I hope he's quaffing the bubbly, rather than coiffing it.

Graaf Statler · Unread post by **Graaf Statler** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 9:01 am

Here you can read what I think is the difference is between slow and fast news. It can never be a newspaper, they have to collect there items out of other sources, and that takes time.
In my opinion it's a idea based on Wikinews, it's a kind of pimped Wikinews with experts as advisors. There are experts, but it is still a project based on the good faith principe. In different words, the wet dream of trolls!

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:30 am

Graaf Statler wrote:Here you can read what I think is the difference is between slow and fast news. It can never be a newspaper, they have to collect there items out of other sources, and that takes time.
In my opinion it's a idea based on Wikinews, it's a kind of pimped Wikinews with experts as advisors. There are experts, but it is still a project based on the good faith principe. In different words, the wet dream of trolls!

Thing is, there aren't really experts, with a plural 's'. There is (by my count) only one journalism expert on the staff, the Launch Editor, Peter Bale. Unless I'm mistaken, all of the other reporters are too junior in the field to possibly be considered to have expertise.

Soldado Sin Nombre · Unread post by **Soldado Sin Nombre** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:51 am

]

I hope he's quaffing the bubbly, rather than coiffing it.

Oh what a difference few letters makes. But you get my point.

And not that Jimbo would ever use a tragic mass shooting as something to promote his own work, but there's been a lot of discussion about fake news and the Las Vegas incident, and it would be a great time to combat fake news, so where's the Wikitribune article?

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Sat Oct 14, 2017 2:56 pm

Jimbo's not going to have a happy Saturday. The Times is on to his current scam.

Six months on there appear to be teething troubles. The London-based site's first "taster" article prompted such derision from supporters that some cancelled...

Any Times subscribers who can give a little more detail on the full article?

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Sat Oct 14, 2017 9:44 pm

Al Jazeera gave Jimbo eleven minutes to talk, with only the weakest softball counterpoint of critique or challenge from Mehdi Hasan (T-H-L). If you can stand to watch it: link.

TLDL: "Wikitribune's culture and values will prevent it being taken over by outside agendas. Wikipedia was practically completely successful in warding off Russian-driven fake news during the US presidential election. Jimmy would vote for Mark Zuckerberg for President, but he himself would not run for office."

P.S. If you want to know the Wikipedia user "most likely to be Mehdi Hasan", look no further than 2yyiam (T-C-L).

Kingsindian · Unread post by **Kingsindian** » Sun Oct 15, 2017 7:54 am

thekohser wrote:Jimbo's not going to have a happy Saturday. The Times is on to his current scam.

Six months on there appear to be teething troubles. The London-based site's first "taster" article prompted such derision from supporters that some cancelled...
Any Times subscribers who can give a little more detail on the full article?

Somebody who doesn't care much about copyright has copy-pasted the entire article on the WiA subreddit.

Kingsindian · Unread post by **Kingsindian** » Mon Oct 16, 2017 6:22 am

thekohser wrote:Remember, ENGAGEMENT IS THE #NO1 METRIC...

For those reading aloud, that's the Number Number One metric.

Leaving aside the typo, I have been thinking about this in the wake of this article in the Atlantic about Facebook. If "engagement" is the number 1 metric, and Facebook optimizes for engagement as well (and is likely to be much better than Wikitribune at it), how is this venture different from Facebook's News Feed, which is supposed to be the very monster which Jimbo is supposed to be fighting?

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Mon Oct 16, 2017 2:07 pm

Kingsindian wrote:...I have been thinking about this in the wake of this article in the Atlantic about Facebook. If "engagement" is the number 1 metric, and Facebook optimizes for engagement as well (and is likely to be much better than Wikitribune at it), how is this venture different from Facebook's News Feed, which is supposed to be the very monster which Jimbo is supposed to be fighting?

I think it's all about who you engage. Facebook engages dum-dumbs who like tailgating before an SEC football game, or who seem obsessed with their child's dance recital. Wikipedia (and by extension, Wikitribune) engages erudite scholars-in-training, who crave nothing more than the dispassionate revealing of Truth and Wisdom. So, Wikitribune will be "better than Facebook", in the same way that Wales said the TPO Community was to be "better than Twitter".

:irony:

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Mon Oct 16, 2017 2:31 pm

Kingsindian wrote:how is this venture different from Facebook's News Feed, which is supposed to be the very monster which Jimbo is supposed to be fighting?

Does Facebook allow people to edit each other's work? Doing so will allow crowdsourcing to produce an excellent final product, such as we can already see on Wikipedia.