126:. The danger that comes with this hierarchy of powers lies in the fact that, if Knowledge is a community, it is a virtual one, divorced to a lesser or greater extent from the real world of consequences. Thus the danger is that, divorced from consequences, those entrusted with power may forget or neglect the senses of community and justice which should curb and determine the way in which power is deployed. The risk is thus that those entrusted with power may succumb to the temptations to bully, intimidate, and control. In short, all the regressive tendencies which may afflict Knowledge editors, are tendencies which may equally afflict administrators and others in the chain of power. Should these tendencies take hold and become hegemonic, the Knowledge project will cease to be a community and become instead a
144:
they are deteriorating. Although oceans of awfulness remain, and seem to rise higher every day, it is still possible that in the long term the negentropic tendency might be a little stronger than the entropic. This, I believe, is the necessary
Wikipedian faith, without which contributors will inevitably sink into despair or retirement.
55:
is the case, then the cybernetic perspective is deficient in failing to recognise that there is an irreducible element of judgment—that is, interpretation—necessary for such an evaluation. This is the true ground of most of the disputes on
Knowledge: beyond disagreements over fact lies differing interpretations of the
143:
Despite the deficiencies of the cybernetic viewpoint, it is still valid to understand the health and prospects of
Knowledge in terms of the relative strengths of entropic and negentropic tendencies. That is, it is still a question of whether, overall, the entries are improving at a greater rate than
54:
In reality, of course, assessing the character of information is not only a question of whether it is correct or incorrect. Any proper evaluation of the direction of the evolution of
Knowledge must include the question of the relative mediocrity or excellence of the information it contains. If this
24:
We do not and can not know what will be important 100 years from now. True. We will let those
Wikipedians of the future decide for themselves. We live here and now, and having total fucking crap (have I ever cursed on Knowledge before?) in Knowledge today, on the theory that the people of 100 years
63:. These are differences grounded in differences of care. It is the inevitable possibility of such differences which makes Knowledge capable of achieving excellence, but this is also what makes it susceptible to regressive or herdish tendencies.
96:
courage editors from succumbing to their irreducible susceptibility to regression. When these regressive tendencies gain strength around an entry, a "culture" (in a bad sense, as in a bacterial culture) develops consisting of
114:
To defend itself against regressive tendencies, Knowledge is built upon a hierarchy of powers. And to defend itself against the potential for abuse of these powers, Knowledge relies on
134:(in a good sense, as in a community of care), lacking the judgment which only a sense of justice can bring, and without which it would be impossible to
49:
Should this ratio fall below one, then the project could be described as entropic, that is, as losing information at a greater rate than gaining it.
37:
From a cybernetic point of view, the success or failure of the
Knowledge project might be conceived as a matter of calculating the following ratio:
80:. Each of these—competition and community—is susceptible to regression. When the competitive tendency becomes regressive, it is called
118:: it hopes that those entrusted with power will employ their powers wisely, that is, with a sense of
25:
hence might want to write an article about it then, strikes me as unwise.--Jimbo Wales
43:(CORRECTIONS + NEW CORRECT FACTS) PER UNIT OF TIME : NEW ERRORS PER UNIT OF TIME
101:, and the result is destructive rather than constructive editing. The best must be
68:
The relation between editors of an entry is a struggle between the tendency toward
138:
the encyclopaedic ends
Knowledge originally projected for itself.
92:
courage editors to strive for competition and community, and to
84:. When the communal tendency becomes regressive, it is called
109:
moted, for
Knowledge to project itself forward, or upward.
88:. The goal of the Knowledge project must be to
8:
7:
59:of those facts, and of what facts
14:
1:
105:moted, and the worst must be
159:
76:) and the tendency toward
72:(in the Greek sense of
130:—that is, no longer a
46:
40:
99:war between herds
150:
158:
157:
153:
152:
151:
149:
148:
147:
122:and a sense of
34:
21:
12:
11:
5:
156:
154:
33:
28:
20:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
155:
146:
145:
140:
139:
137:
133:
129:
128:cult of power
125:
121:
117:
111:
110:
108:
104:
100:
95:
91:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
65:
64:
62:
58:
51:
50:
45:
44:
39:
38:
32:
29:
27:
26:
19:
16:
142:
141:
135:
131:
127:
123:
119:
115:
113:
112:
106:
102:
98:
93:
89:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
67:
66:
60:
56:
53:
52:
48:
47:
42:
41:
36:
35:
31:On Knowledge
30:
23:
22:
17:
86:herdishness
70:competition
18:A quotation
136:cultivate
124:community
78:community
132:culture
120:justice
61:matter
57:matter
116:trust
74:eris
103:pro
94:dis
82:war
107:de
90:en
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.