Context : OnWiki
Particularly after SunirShah is losing faith http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?CurrentWikidomProblems
Rambling thoughts... Isn't death natural, a community where there is no change, no forces, is, perhaps, already dead? The death of, say, WardsWiki?, in respect to what it was originally intended means it has changed, the founding-members may be gone (doing something else) but new people come and take it in a new direction. DarrylReanny? writes in a lovely book (TheDeathOfForever?)...
the old "I" cannot "go on" because it is in the process of restructuring itself
That somehow seems in tune with the WikiWay?. Giving birth to something we can't predict/control is a nice feeling (scary too, the community can turn in on itself and self-implode (something the LotusJuggernaut? and other expensive KM solutions would probably applaud), or reflect and learn. Didn't AutoPoiesis reach the conclusion that "love" was the way. I'll stop for now before this gets too wooly, lest to say that it's easier to comment here, in the hope of collaborative editing, than in EMail or on a BLOG - Heather, what are the co-web things you've been reading about (in your blog entry)?
Wiki is dead, long live wiki. The Sky is Falling, can we prop it up a little (ban the Chinese domain, until someone asks for permission ;) TitForTat? reply in kind. Kudo's to Phil for WritingInPublic – kk
: thanks for the reply kk. (Welcome to ThoughtStorms. Wanna create a PersonalHomePage about yourself? :-) I agree, I wondered about something similar on ThoughtStormsIsNotPermanent. Clearly the organic nature of wiki demands that it does eventually decay and die, (although it may reproduce, if relationships between people or bisociations of ideas created there, move to other locations.) But at the same time, AutoPoiesis also means preserving your own boundaries. To be alive is to accept inevitable death, and yet to try to resist the decay and stay alive. That propping it up a little is not just a side-show, it is also the essence of life. – PhilJones
Hi Phil, well, if you'll permit I'd like to play the role of anonymous-coward, or at least not leave trace of real identity on one of those unmaintained home-pages (to avoid being googled :), which just seem to clutter up wikis, like the thread-mode this paragraph is part of. Real name Ken, which I'll probably delete in a few days if noone else does, been personal-wiki'ing (I agree Heather, it's superiour to vanilla html) for several years and living in Eire - oddly enough, Heather, I discovered after the event that we were in the same room when you came up to Derry to see EdwardDeBono? this summer (I loved his upside down writing :), would have been nice to hook up. How interesting, too, when we ponder the lifespan of a wiki, here, to view the pictures of the GreatWallOfChina being reclaimed by nature, how fragile this all is and definitely not permanent. Nice point about the boundaries. Anyway, for me, wiki's, personal or public, are very much alive and EMail and BLOG's are dead, or not nearly as life-like: there's much more community in the wiki and the problems/opportunities of learning how we scale as groups is intriguing, as is the parallels in economics. Keep up the good work, Phil, there's an intriguing mix emerging here and, importantly, what appears to be a group who care enough to help fight the spam. Does anybody hve a reference to the wikipedia "142" problem? – kk
I'm mystified as to what the 142 problem is, too. – PhilJones
See also :
- CommunityOrGenre (should we have a "document" or "community" notion of wiki? Read SunirShah's comments to Heather's story)