From: address@hidden
> There's a difference between the GNE of the future with 12 million
articles
> in it and Usenet: You can't link to other Usenet articles.
If I was going to be picky here, I'd point out that threading works from
Usenet article links in the headers. But I'm not, so I won't :-)
> The whole point of GNE is that the articles with value to an author can
be
> permanently linked by that author in his/her article.
>
> There has been ample discussion on how to establish these links on this
> list, such as ID numbers stored in a central DB.
>
> So while there may be some of everything, the articles that best reflect
the
> "though of the day" would be linked more often, and the fringe ones
would
be
> linked less.
>
> The classifiers, who would be independent of the articles themselves,
could
> make whatever word lists or directory systems they want, linking to the
> articles they prefer. Someone doing an eastern religion directory would
> certainly include links to articles that are very different than those
> included by a space-exploration specialist.
>
> The idea is that either of these people would find articles relating to
> their entries, of various level of value and quality, to be sure, yet in
> abundance.
>
> As far as GNE being a social experiment, I doubt that not. As far as its
> ending up like usenet, I'd like to know what usenet has ended up being,
> exactly.
In the context of GNE, Usenet is a huge discussion forum where pretty much
anything goes. My 200 line dissertation on the use of zinc in the computer
industry in the late 20th century (to chose a random and possibly useless
example) is likely to degenerate into a thread consisting of very few
articles which add to the original discussion and a great many which are
argumentative for its own sake.
My concern about GNE (and it *is* only a personal one) revolves round the
lack of editorial influence, and the resulting dilution of content. Having
a dozen different views of Tiannamen Square is useful, likewise different
sides in the evolution/creation argument. However, for me at any rate,
there has to be a limit on what can easily degenerate into name calling.
This is clearly contrary to the intended direction for GNE.
Paul
> >From: "Hector Facundo Arena" <address@hidden>
> >
> > > Then it's not going to be an encyclopedia, is it? It's going to be
a
> > > library concentrating on electronic submissions with the mandate
> > > that anyone
> > > who cares to put finger to keyboard has the right to add work to the
> > > repository, with a few minor exceptions (as discussed - spam, mail
> > > bombs/viruses and copyrighted work).
> >
> >Call it however you want. The project is called GNE :)
> >
> > > It's undoubtedly going to be one of the biggest and best social
> > > experiments
> > > going, and will probably end up like usenet.
> >
> >Well, I can't agree with that cos I don't see the future...
> >
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-gne mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gne
>
_______________________________________________
Bug-gne mailing list
address@hidden
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gne