[diversity-talk] Article about Wikipedia's dysfunctional culture

[Darrell Fuhriman]

It was a good article, and while OSM certainly isn’t as bad as Wikipedia, I think it has more to do with scale than any inherently better structure. The organizational problems sound extremely familiar.

Tell me how this doesn’t also describe OSM?

“The encyclopedia that anyone can edit” is at risk of becoming, in computer scientist Aaron Halfaker’s words, “the encyclopedia that anyone who understands the norms, socializes him or herself, dodges the impersonal wall of semiautomated rejection and still wants to voluntarily contribute his or her time and energy can edit.” An entrenched, stubborn elite of old-timers, a high bar to entry, and a persistent 90/10 gender gap among editors all point to the possibility that Wikipedia is going adrift.”

If anything, Wikipedia should serve as a cautionary tale.

Though I would add, that one huge difference is that Wikipedia has a foundation that actually sees this as a problem, and is working to do something about it. I’m not sure I see the same will in OSM — in fact, we have a foundation that has traditionally tried to do as little as possible. 

d.


On Dec 11, 2014, at 21:04, Alan McConchie <alan.mcconchie at gmail.com> wrote:

> There are certainly some parallels with OpenStreetMap in this article, but overall it really puts things in perspective: OSM's culture could be a lot worse. A fascinating read. 
> 
> http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/12/wikipedia_editing_disputes_the_crowdsourced_encyclopedia_has_become_a_rancorous.html
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> diversity-talk mailing list
> diversity-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/diversity-talk

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/diversity-talk/attachments/20141212/60557887/attachment.html>