From Textop Wiki
|Welcome to the planning pages|
The planning wiki
As future members of Citizendium, please feel free to make this into an excellent project planning resource.
If you wish to contribute to this wiki, in the spirit of Citizendium, please sign up using your own real name as your username.
This wiki is for any documents about the Citizendium project that you would like others to collaborate on. Here: arguments from the discussion forums and mailing lists are summarised; ideas are documented; and technical designs are advanced. It's a useful resource for those who have little time to spare. Please contribute, and add any pages created to Category:Citizendium.
- For relaxed, conversational debate - head to the Citizendium forums at http://smf.citizendium.org.
- For reasoned argument and in-depth collaboration - please use the Citizendium mailing lists at http://www.citizendium.org/lists.html
- What is Citizendium and the vision for it? - See http://www.citizendium.org.
We will move these planning pages to a specially set-up "meta" wiki when one is created.
05 October 2006 - Pilot Project
26 September 2006 - Communications
The mailing lists are a place to focus on quality over quantity; somewhere to put minds together and carefully and at length come to well-reasoned, deeply-reasoned recommendations for the project. :See Working rules for the Mailing lists.
The Citizendium discussion forums are now live at http://smf.citizendium.org. This is the place for chat and informal exchanges for the project. The forums are moderated.
22 September 2006 - Citizendium on the web
As of Friday, 22 September 2006, 06:17 GMT, a search on Google, using the term "Citizendium", returned over one million hits. Library staff around the world, whose job it is to monitor blogs to do with new forms of information dissemination and information technology, have already noticed a huge upsurge in interest in this project, as well as links to this wiki.
These milestones should be only the most significant "watershed" developments in the project.
Launch website(Sept. 15)
Make initial announcement(Sept. 15)
Launch mailing lists(Sept. 20)
Launch forums and re-launch mailing lists(Sept. 26)
Find wiki host/co-lo(Oct. 12)
- Do press release
- Launch wiki privately (pilot project)
- Launch wiki publicly
- Hold first face-to-face meeting
- Adopt charter
- How do we define a field?
- How should topics be structured?
- How should we handle sourcing?
- On the nature and sources of knowledge
- Mailing lists to solicit
- Blogs to solicit
- Professional organizations to solicit
- How do we attract collaborators?
- How shall we do copyediting?
- On the nature and sources of expertise
- What makes someone an expert?
- What types of contributors do we need?
- Do we need a temporary forum?
- How do we market Citizendium?
- How should the Real Names policy work?
- What should we do about importing articles?
- When should we aim to go public?
- Pilot project
- JA: Here's the thing, as far as I go. I don't get this bit about "constables" and I probably never will. I think that you'll probably be sorry someday that you ever went down that road -- again. I think that I can begin to see the wisdom of forking the whole compendious-quality content at once. If you ever get around to actually working on articles, then that is something I can understand, and if I am lucky enough to be "chosen" to work on some of the articles that I created or made major contributions to on Wikipedia then I will help you work on those. 'Nuff said. Jon Awbrey 09:00, 8 October 2006 (PDT)
- JA: Larry's idea to treat the Forum as a chat-room has reduced the usefulness of that kind of board system. If you have to be away for an hour or two there are 40 new messages, swamping the 10-new-message list, and 90% of them trivial chatter. Plus we are having power blips here, forcing me to work through a notepad buffer. So I'll have deal off the top and respond via wiki only to what I regard as the most important issues that I happen to see. Jon Awbrey 10:32, 13 October 2006 (PDT)
- JA: Somebody suggested "adjudicator". I had at one time been thinking of "ombudsman", but I got the impression that Larry was thinking more of a "decision of the constabulary is final" sort of role, so I didn't bother with that. I begin to think that maybe we should just call a Sam Spade a Sam Spade and use the term that Plato used in the Republic, to wit, phylax, usually translated guardian. Now, that's the word we get prophylactic from, so be prepared for some, er, ribbing. But heck, if you can take the heat of Dogberry and Keystone Cop, what's a little more poking in the ribs gonna hurt? Jon Awbrey 10:46, 13 October 2006 (PDT)
- All kidding aside -- not an EZ thing for me to do this late on a Friday night -- and as I've tried to emphasize repeatedly, it's not about the name, it's about the game. Like the title says, it's a larger problem with the very metaphor of community itself. Saying this is yet another painful duty for a person who frequently argues for the value of metaphors, but there is more than a metaphor here -- there's what we call a "category confusion" that confounds abstract and concrete senses of the word "community" and slips down the slope from one to the other and back again without most folks noticing the logical and practical error that has grabbed you by the lapels and truncheoned you about the head and ears before you even know what's happened.
- PS. I will move these notes to the talk page when they get to be old biz. Jon Awbrey 19:28, 13 October 2006 (PDT)
- JA: This "Chinese Dissident" argument for editorial anonymity just doesn't fly. Newspapers do not print anonymous letters to the editor, but journalists have always had ways of working with confidential sources. But it's the reporters and editors who assume the responsibility of checking and vetting what their various sources say, not the informant, who sees things from only one perspective. I don't see any new problems here. Jon Awbrey 19:46, 13 October 2006 (PDT)