It was never and can never be sustainable to depend on a small number of super-contributors for a "crowd-sourced" knowledge store.
Maybe the Wikimedia Foundation should focus more on attracting and keeping a broader range and number of contributors instead of curating few it considered "good".
Decently well? Society has its problems, but its had some pretty cool accomplishments along the way.
More to the point, i think your argument would be more compelling if you had some examples of non-"small world graph" endeavours that worked out well. I'd love for some experiments, but i think we need some succesful experiments before saying that its a better model.
Comments
It was never and can never be sustainable to depend on a small number of super-contributors for a "crowd-sourced" knowledge store.
Maybe the Wikimedia Foundation should focus more on attracting and keeping a broader range and number of contributors instead of curating few it considered "good".
Why not? That's how the rest of the world works. Almost every human endeavour forms a small world graph.
How's that working out?
Decently well? Society has its problems, but its had some pretty cool accomplishments along the way.
More to the point, i think your argument would be more compelling if you had some examples of non-"small world graph" endeavours that worked out well. I'd love for some experiments, but i think we need some succesful experiments before saying that its a better model.
There are millions of oppressed, desperately poor, and disadvantage people who would scoff at that assessment.