Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 8:36 am
Democratisation in this context does not really mean anything about democracy. It would perhaps be better to view it as deregulation, or creation of a level playing field.
Wikipedia tries not to regulate itself through use of force (moderators approximately equal police), nor by direct democratic election, Possibly due to the vast number of people, and articles which would need to be co-ordinated. Instead they attempt to run on consensus of those who express an interest within a framework of rules.
Personally, I think the system sucks, but I cannot think of a better alternative. Look at citizendium or conservopedia, or even h2g2 to see other attempts to do wikipedia but differently.
This is off topic, but of course in most democratic (or republic based, for those of you who refuse to call western democracies democratic) nations, referenda are not held or each decision, but rather you get to vote once in a blue moon for some 2 faced liar^W^W^W guy in a suit, who does whatever he, his boss, or his God wants him to do in your name. So you could argue that wikipedia is more democratic than anything currently using the name :p
Wikipedia tries not to regulate itself through use of force (moderators approximately equal police), nor by direct democratic election, Possibly due to the vast number of people, and articles which would need to be co-ordinated. Instead they attempt to run on consensus of those who express an interest within a framework of rules.
Personally, I think the system sucks, but I cannot think of a better alternative. Look at citizendium or conservopedia, or even h2g2 to see other attempts to do wikipedia but differently.
This is off topic, but of course in most democratic (or republic based, for those of you who refuse to call western democracies democratic) nations, referenda are not held or each decision, but rather you get to vote once in a blue moon for some 2 faced liar^W^W^W guy in a suit, who does whatever he, his boss, or his God wants him to do in your name. So you could argue that wikipedia is more democratic than anything currently using the name :p
