by Anonymous Coward writes: on Monday April 18, 2005 @02:30PM (#12272015)
A few thoughts.
My impression was that Sanger was hired and paid by Jimmy to work on nupedia and wikipedia. I didn't realize he was the co-founder of these efforts?
"[Nupedia] might appear to have died of its own weight and complexity. But, as I will explain, it could have been redesigned and adapted--it could have, as it were, 'learned from its mistakes'..."
The above describes a million projects. Yes, everything could be a success, and we are happy to imagine how, but the thing is, execution counts for a LOT, and the possability of success is a lot different then the realities of success.
This article is very defensive, and I'm surprised it will show up in Open Sources. I think the article on anti-elitism has more interest then this frankly, which is an extremely long and somewhat illdefined 'history'/defense of Sangers involvement in wikipedia. Feels more like blog material then a full article.
A few thoughts (Score:1, Interesting)
My impression was that Sanger was hired and paid by Jimmy to work on nupedia and wikipedia. I didn't realize he was the co-founder of these efforts?
"[Nupedia] might appear to have died of its own weight and complexity. But, as I will explain, it could have been redesigned and adapted--it could have, as it were, 'learned from its mistakes'..."
The above describes a million projects. Yes, everything could be a success, and we are happy to imagine how, but the thing is, execution counts for a LOT, and the possability of success is a lot different then the realities of success.
This article is very defensive, and I'm surprised it will show up in Open Sources. I think the article on anti-elitism has more interest then this frankly, which is an extremely long and somewhat illdefined 'history'/defense of Sangers involvement in wikipedia. Feels more like blog material then a full article.