<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
I totally agree with Elad, but I would like to say, that at the end of
the day, there is always a fundamental value upon which a project like
Wikipedia, or any project of this kind, should be established. The idea
of Wikipedia, as far as I understood it when I joined it, was trying to
present the truth to the best of our current knowledge, by allowing a
productive negotiation among people of different PoVs. This idea is
undoubtedly based on Western modernist values, but then again, why not?
My problem with the current policy of the Wikimedia movement (i.e. the
official and unofficial organizations/online communities that make
Wikipedia) is that they deviated from this original value, and adopted
a more post-modernist/relativist approach, pulling the carpet under the
feet of people like me, who adhere to the "old values" of Wikipedia. I
suppose these are not shocking news, because it happened before with
similar movements (and too often ended much more tragically), and yet,
as Eldad described, the current approach simply doesn't fit the
platform. If we adopt a relativist approach, then it would be wrong to
have an "article page" where only one version is presented. I feel that
in the current approach, we might as well be satisfied with the talk
pages of the articles and do without the article page.<br>
<br>
Coming back to my first argument about an essential value that must
underlie any project, think of Descartes saying "dubito ergo cogito,
cogito ergo sum" (I doubt therefore I think, I think therefore I am).
He said he found the ultimate truth, i.e. the inability to deny one's
existence, because one cannot doubt the fact that one doubts. And yet
you can ask: who says that one should doubt at all? Who says that
finding the ultimate truth is important at all? Well, this was just an
over-philosophic example...<br>
<br>
Dror<br>
<br>
בתאריך 14/06/10 19:33, ציטוט Elad Wieder:
<blockquote
cite="mid:AANLkTilc5BEJ6auRJFUK1K4fG2brNhoqA9s4LORKeL3F@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">I doubt if merely interlinking several encyclopedias
would do the job; I believe that the solution that evolved for
offering the general public with different goods is a Market; in our
case - a market for Points of View.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Every market has fallacies and failures, and the design of a
marketplace that will be both inviting for all kinds of ideas and
approaches, while keeping balances and allowing all of them to co-exist
is a very complicated challenge. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Having that said, I would argue that the wiki platform is not
suitable nor intended to serve as a marketplace; it is a tool for
building content as a community, while people of different dogmatic
PoVs we discussed can hardly be considered to be a community (they
don't share essential common values, interest and goals - but competing
ones).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>A more appropriate platform for a marketplace would allow each
community to collaborate and build its content, while enabling and
facilitating the public to compare and choose between such competeing
PoVs of the different communities. Of course, a sophisticated
marketplace would also allow the discourse and interlinking between
such communities.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Elad</div>
<div><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 18:25, Juliana
Brunello <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:juliana@networkcultures.org">juliana@networkcultures.org</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Hi
Elad,<br>
<br>
this is so very true! But what can be done to stop 'fragmentation'?
Should<br>
the content of several encyclopedias with different povs be interlinked?<br>
would that work?<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Juliana<br>
</font>
<div>
<div class="h5"><br>
> One of the very apparent deficiencies of Wikipedia, inherent to
choosing<br>
> wiki as the platform for building and encyclopedia, is that is
does not<br>
> serve as a "market" for opinions or for PoVs; rather it is being
used as a<br>
> battlefield for getting one's PoV to prevail: only one version of a<br>
> document/term is presented to the general public at each point in
time.<br>
><br>
> One may say that ideally the version presented in Wikipedia should
be<br>
> pluralistic so to represent different PoVs for each term/subject,
but this<br>
> way of thinking by itself is very much a liberal PoV, biased by
itself; it<br>
> can be argued on behalf of any dogmatic PoV (be it any of the
religions or<br>
> dogmas like political stands etc.) that in order to "do justice"
with its<br>
> arguments, the public should be able to observe its definitions (or<br>
> encyclopedic entries) in a holistic manner, not being digested and<br>
> compared<br>
> to other ideas on a "by paragraph" basis.<br>
><br>
> Because Wikipedia does not enable the presentation of parallel
dogmatic<br>
> PoVs<br>
> to the general public in the same time, those who support other
PoVs<br>
> (essentially, less pluralistic/liberal) are driven to come up with<br>
> separated encyclopedias.<br>
><br>
> The outcome, IMHO, is that dominant sectors would get tired from
the<br>
> "battlefield" and thus from the dialog; the "pluralistic"
Wikipedia will<br>
> either (1) be hijacked by a certain dogma, or (2) lack the
contribution of<br>
> the "enthusiasts" who in turn will go to present their ideas on a<br>
> separate,<br>
> more supportive, stage.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Elad<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 17:04, Maja van der Velden<br>
> <<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:majava@ifi.uio.no">majava@ifi.uio.no</a>>wrote:<br>
><br>
>> Hi Juliana,<br>
>><br>
>> I am traveling and i don't have much time. I find this an
interesting<br>
>> topic. I am sorry i have to be brief in my reply. Maybe i
misunderstand,<br>
>> but<br>
>> i understand in this context 'christianization' and 'western'
as<br>
>> different<br>
>> from each other. I based my comment on the fact that there are
christian<br>
>> websites, christian search engines, christian software
releases (e.g.<br>
>> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.ubuntuce.com/"
target="_blank">http://www.ubuntuce.com/</a>) etc. that target people
with Christian<br>
>> religious<br>
>> beliefs.<br>
>><br>
>> In my CPOV presentation i proposed the idea of a distributed
Wikipedia.<br>
>> I<br>
>> know that is understood as something else as the sites
mentioned in your<br>
>> article. But i think we already have many POVs. Having your
POV made<br>
>> invisible may do more harm.<br>
>><br>
>> Greetings,<br>
>><br>
>> Maja<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Jun 14, 2010, at 3:47 PM, Juliana Brunello wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Hi Maja,<br>
>>><br>
>>> I don't believe we can speak of 'christianization of the
web', but from<br>
>>> a<br>
>>> 'westernization'. Basically, the internet was born in the
west and it<br>
>>> was<br>
>>> only natural for it to represent western views. I do
praise diversity,<br>
>>> but<br>
>>> that was not my point. The question is, if separating povs
- a chinese<br>
>>> encyclopedia, a muslim, a 'western' - that do not
communicate with one<br>
>>> another. Will the definitions of reality of each nation be
strengthen<br>
>>> and<br>
>>> cooperation and understanding among them be weakened?<br>
>>><br>
>>> Juliana<br>
>>><br>
>>> Hi Juliana,<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> We can also speak of the 'christianization on the web'
- but that<br>
>>>> trend does not seem to attract the same media coverage.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> About 'separatism': If 'western' is perceived as
representative of the<br>
>>>> world, then, I guess you can call the move away
'separatism'.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I find it sometimes more productive to look for the
differences<br>
>>>> (diversity) within a system or category and the
similarities across<br>
>>>> systems or categories.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Greetings,<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Maja<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> On Jun 14, 2010, at 2:39 PM, Juliana Brunello wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Islamicfacebook.com, NaqaTube, <a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://imhalal.com" target="_blank">imhalal.com</a>
and now Ilmpedia. These<br>
>>>>> are all<br>
>>>>> Muslim sites based on well known 'western' social
sites. Ilmpedia<br>
>>>>> will be<br>
>>>>> an encyclopedia based mostly on Islamic sources.
The article linked<br>
>>>>> below<br>
>>>>> states that "websites like these are part of a
growing trend of<br>
>>>>> Islamisation on the web". I ask myself, what the
consequences of this<br>
>>>>> separatism from the 'western' websites are going
to be. Will we have<br>
>>>>> more<br>
>>>>> information sources with different povs, so that
we will be able to<br>
>>>>> form<br>
>>>>> our own opinions in a more balanced way; or will
we have the<br>
>>>>> opposite, one<br>
>>>>> stream fighting the other and strengthening biased
povs even more? I<br>
>>>>> wish<br>
>>>>> for the first, but I am not all too positive about
it.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=244958"
target="_blank">http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=244958</a><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Juliana<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Institute of Network Cultures<br>
>>>>> HvA Interactive Media<br>
>>>>> t: +31 (0)20 595 18 66<br>
>>>>> f: +31 (0)20 595 18 40<br>
>>>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.networkcultures.org" target="_blank">www.networkcultures.org</a><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>>>> Cpov_listcultures.org mailing list<br>
>>>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Cpov_listcultures.org@p10.alfaservers.com">Cpov_listcultures.org@p10.alfaservers.com</a><br>
>>>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://p10.alfaservers.com/mailman/listinfo/cpov_listcultures.org"
target="_blank">http://p10.alfaservers.com/mailman/listinfo/cpov_listcultures.org</a><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Cpov_listcultures.org mailing list<br>
>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Cpov_listcultures.org@p10.alfaservers.com">Cpov_listcultures.org@p10.alfaservers.com</a><br>
>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://p10.alfaservers.com/mailman/listinfo/cpov_listcultures.org"
target="_blank">http://p10.alfaservers.com/mailman/listinfo/cpov_listcultures.org</a><br>
>><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<pre wrap="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
_______________________________________________
Cpov_listcultures.org mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Cpov_listcultures.org@p10.alfaservers.com">Cpov_listcultures.org@p10.alfaservers.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://p10.alfaservers.com/mailman/listinfo/cpov_listcultures.org">http://p10.alfaservers.com/mailman/listinfo/cpov_listcultures.org</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>