Simple test: do you *really* think the world would be a better informed place in a broad sense if Wikipedia were shut down by law today? If yes then I walk away from this thread jaw open and doubting your sanity.
Conversation
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Fine then, my diff with you is probably that I think people are engaging with it just fine. Even if they get uppity with professors who know better as a result and don't always read a conflict right. ie they're drinking responsibly most of the time.
1
2
The "rampant crazy alcoholism" is happening via other sources like say infowars or anti-vaxx facebook groups, not wikipedia (which is what I'm specifically defending).
1
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
The one thing I'd agree with you on is that the wikipedia model is not in fact generalizable at all. It remains the n=1 sample proof point of too many arguments.
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
I think the future is knowledge being embedded in context-aware information toolchains. Tvtropes points to the future better than wikipedia, though it captures a not-quite-functional knowledge.
