Small section at the bottom of pages to be wiki?
Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 2:59 pm
To wiki or not to wiki? That is the question...
Lately I have heard many rumors about a coming wiki addition to SP. I would like to comment on that and hear from others.
In the business world, there's an important idea that if you have a successful model, don't change it. Structural change can jeopardize success. SummitPost is the best mountaineering resource in the world for a reason. It has a huge following and thousands of active users. In short, our structural model works. Change can be good, but I fear that structural change might take us in the wrong direction, away from what has brought us success. Many of the recent changes are excellent and I applaud the folks who have put work into those projects. Their dedication is honorable.
I am completely against this wiki idea. This is a structural change, whether it affects a section or the entire page. The additions/corrections section works fine. It would be better to display additions/corrections at the bottom of the page, below the images, so it's more visible. Incorporating a wiki would be a move in the wrong direction. It could lead to future flippant structural changes. Why experiment with the structural supports on a building if the building is standing strong? This is a very effective way to estrange current users, causing active contributors to leave the site. It's undermining to the people who have put countless hours into presenting the best information available at the time. When someone posts additions/corrections to one of my pages, I verify the information and then incorporate that into the page. If my submissions all of a sudden include a wiki without my consent, I may choose to no longer submit content.
What is the real issue here? Old pages that are in need of renovation? Perhaps when a page has a low enough score or it's owner has been inactive for a few years, it could be transferred automatically to the adoption folder. Perhaps adoption pages should be entirely wiki until they are adopted by a new owner. What do you think about that?
This post was spurred from one I encountered on a secondary website. Why are we discussing changing SP on a separate website where not as many members are likely to see it?
Lately I have heard many rumors about a coming wiki addition to SP. I would like to comment on that and hear from others.
In the business world, there's an important idea that if you have a successful model, don't change it. Structural change can jeopardize success. SummitPost is the best mountaineering resource in the world for a reason. It has a huge following and thousands of active users. In short, our structural model works. Change can be good, but I fear that structural change might take us in the wrong direction, away from what has brought us success. Many of the recent changes are excellent and I applaud the folks who have put work into those projects. Their dedication is honorable.
I am completely against this wiki idea. This is a structural change, whether it affects a section or the entire page. The additions/corrections section works fine. It would be better to display additions/corrections at the bottom of the page, below the images, so it's more visible. Incorporating a wiki would be a move in the wrong direction. It could lead to future flippant structural changes. Why experiment with the structural supports on a building if the building is standing strong? This is a very effective way to estrange current users, causing active contributors to leave the site. It's undermining to the people who have put countless hours into presenting the best information available at the time. When someone posts additions/corrections to one of my pages, I verify the information and then incorporate that into the page. If my submissions all of a sudden include a wiki without my consent, I may choose to no longer submit content.
What is the real issue here? Old pages that are in need of renovation? Perhaps when a page has a low enough score or it's owner has been inactive for a few years, it could be transferred automatically to the adoption folder. Perhaps adoption pages should be entirely wiki until they are adopted by a new owner. What do you think about that?
This post was spurred from one I encountered on a secondary website. Why are we discussing changing SP on a separate website where not as many members are likely to see it?