[Linux] flux wiki?

[Chris 'Chipper' Chiapusio]

On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 11:51:44AM -0400, Adam Glass wrote:
>On 3/30/07, Robert Citek <robert.citek@gmail.com> wrote:
>>It's a wiki.  There's no reason we cannot just let it grow organically.
>>  Worst case: we shut it down and start over.
>
>That would be true for a private individual's site.  But if I am
>reading correctly, there seems to be a desire to have a FLUX wiki
>(which really means it should be installed on the FLUX machine, but
>that's a topic for another day).
>
>So the question becomes, what would we put there?  A wiki is a hammer,
>a tool.  Are there actually any nails ... content ... that we need to

A Wiki is a hammer that anyone can pick up and use effectively, don't leave
hammers lying around people you do not trust.  The Current www.flux.org
LUG-BLOG is a jackhammer that only trained folks have access to or are able
to use.

The question is one of representation, do you want to open up what is
published in the name of FLUX to the masses, even if limited by registration?

If you do, it doesnt *have* to be on the flux machine unless you are willing
to take on the onus of software maintenance.  Co-branding and interlinking is
all that is necessary to appoint legitimacy to any given wiki installation.

I like a wiki and agree that there is a time and a place for them to be used.
Not all list members know, understand, or care about such trivialities.  They
want to play with the new toy.

Middle ground: link from flux.org to the "Wiki Trial Site".  Wait and see if
valuable content is produced by the community, and if the wild west gets
overrun by tumbleweeds, you still have your jackhammer to blast the last
vestiges of association away.


>publish in that way?  It does not make sense to have a random
>collection of tips, rants, politics, etc ... and you know all of those
>would creep in.  The result is a disorganized jumble of pages, and all
>the Linux topics are likely covered elsewhere on the internet already.

It doesnt have to be that way if enough users look and see it happening. *IF*
the lightbulbs go off and people realize that they are not in the wikipedia
utopia, some may get organized enought to make a difference.

>This also puts FLUX in the position of judging and moderating content.
>Clearly if someone posts porno it should be removed ... but what if
>they post something that may or may not be acceptable, on a FLUX site?
>The flame wars that would erupt would consume time and energy that
>should be used elsewhere.
>
>Once again, the FLUX website can be used to post information useful to
>the usergroup and the South Florida Linux community.  Is there any
>information that is also useful to the same community which would
>require a wiki to hold it?
>
>If not, my feeling is that private individual's wikis can hold
>whatever information they like, but the FLUX name should not be on
>them, nor should they claim to represent the group.

To everyone else: Heed this last paragraph, we acknowledge Adams role in this
organization and ultimately we defer to his decision.  unless you think you
can do a better job than Adam has done for the past decade.

>
>--Adam

--Chipper
>_______________________________________________
>Linux mailing list
>Linux@flux.org
>http://www.flux.org/mailman/listinfo/linux

-- 
------
                      Please encrypt anything important.
   PGP Key: http://wwwkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x6CFA486D
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little 
    temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety " - Benjamin Franklin
                        quis custodiet ipsos custodes?