Wikis, Still cool, or 2008? Options

[Kurt M. Weber]

Wikis remain a useful way to permit non-technical users to publish content in a collaborative manner that provides capabilities for hierarchical organization and categorization, easy hyperlinking to related content in-text.

One of my current projects is developing a Mediawiki wiki for developers of constructed worlds to present their worlds. Each world is given its own namespace by the site administration, and the creator of each world is given admin rights over that namespace as well as the privileges necessary to grant or revoke admin rights over the same namespace to whomever he or she wishes.

Similarly, another project I've considered is developing a constructed world where, instead of presenting the story of the world directly, the worldbuilders create and release "primary sources," and those interested then evaluate those sources critically in light of already-discovered sources to build the history of the world themselves. A wiki is a great tool for something like this.

Dweeb.

Indeed.

Is God still on your side, Magister?

Is the rotting corpse of Ayn Rand on yours?

Not so much. I had an epiphany after the massacres at Oakland and UC Davis.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Presumably some sort of Randoid infighting that nobody cares about. Given Wikipedian usage "massacres" probably refers to someone saying something unpleasant. Tlatelolco Massacare, yes. But Oakland and UC Davis? Unless you mean the Goh shootings? That seems like a piece of individual madness that resulted in a real tragedy but I'm not following why this would result in an epiphany.

The violent assaults on protesters in those places last fall made me realize that yes, private accumulation of wealth is indeed a form of coercive power.

[GlassBeadGame]

Wikis remain a useful way to permit non-technical users to publish content in a collaborative manner that provides capabilities for hierarchical organization and categorization, easy hyperlinking to related content in-text.

One of my current projects is developing a Mediawiki wiki for developers of constructed worlds to present their worlds. Each world is given its own namespace by the site administration, and the creator of each world is given admin rights over that namespace as well as the privileges necessary to grant or revoke admin rights over the same namespace to whomever he or she wishes.

Similarly, another project I've considered is developing a constructed world where, instead of presenting the story of the world directly, the worldbuilders create and release "primary sources," and those interested then evaluate those sources critically in light of already-discovered sources to build the history of the world themselves. A wiki is a great tool for something like this.

Dweeb.

Indeed.

Is God still on your side, Magister?

Is the rotting corpse of Ayn Rand on yours?

Not so much. I had an epiphany after the massacres at Oakland and UC Davis.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Presumably some sort of Randoid infighting that nobody cares about. Given Wikipedian usage "massacres" probably refers to someone saying something unpleasant. Tlatelolco Massacre, yes. But Oakland and UC Davis? Unless you mean the Goh shootings? That seems like a piece of individual madness that resulted in a real tragedy but I'm not following why this would result in an epiphany.

The violent assaults on protesters in those places last fall made me realize that yes, private accumulation of wealth is indeed a form of coercive power.

So you "turned?" Good for you. Best of all you can read some non-crappy books now. Making fun of AR's writing will help with you're recovery. I'm with you on the excessive force toward the Occupy protesters, but still its a long ways from a "massacre."

[Retrospect]

Are any public wikis besides Wikipedia actually thriving?

A few, mainly specialised ones.