SPUG:YAPC Wiki Site

[Michael R. Wolf]

SPUG-list-owner <tim at consultix-inc.com> writes:

> On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 12:42:16PM -0700, Andrew Sweger wrote:
>> On Fri, 13 Jun 2003, SPUG-list-owner wrote:
>> 
>> > As is always the case with Ingy's productions, the software
>> > is way cool!
>> 
>> And how. I've got a couple internal Kwiki's already set up (I also have
>> Debian woody packages built if anyone is interested). It's a sweet package
>> and the sky's the limit how where it can go from here.
>> 
>>   http://www.kwiki.org/
>> -- 
>> Andrew B. Sweger 
>
> Any ideas on how we could use a wiki for SPUGly purposes?

[[Preface -- I know this is a tangent to the original post. Please
bear with me and reply to my points, not my divergence from the
original point.]]

Call me old fashioned, but I have a *strong* preference for
discussions to continue via email or news. "Click, drag, move, mouse"
is significantly more annoying to me than using my home-key-based
news/email environment. A mouse is an effecient beginning input
device, but an inefficient advanced tool. (Don't believe it? Disable
your keyboard, but enable a window with a keyboard image in it, then
see how well you compose messages with a mouse.)

    WYSIWYG is a step backwards. Human labor is used to do that which the
    computer can do better.
      -- Andrew S. Tanenbaum

I get that Wiki is an attempt at simple WYSIWYG, but it cuts off a
whole lineage of news reading tools and requires folks to navigate
themselves to the news rather than having the news come to them. In
that respect, Wiki is counter to much of the culture of news reading.
I get a newspaper delivered to my door, despite having a public
library 2 blocks away. Call me wasteful! It just fits in with my
routine, and I like my services to serve me, not me to cater to them.

I think Wiki may be good for other things, however. But don't reinvent
the flat tire (a recognition that a wheel is many iterations later)
just to try a new technology. Use existing technology to compose,
deliver, and view the content. The energy you save could be invested
in the creativity of creating *content* not redeveloping *structure*.

So, I'd prefer that we do *nog* explore Wiki for a *replacement* of
this discussion. But if Wiki could be a *mirror* of this by using a
SMTP or NNTP gateway, that would be better -- Add folks who perfer
Wiki, without cutting off folks who don't. (That seems to be how many
of the perl.org groups are. I read 'em with NNTP, but many folks read
them with HTTP.)

End rant,
Michael Wolf

P.S. I know my reply wasn't in direct response to the original post.
It just triggered somethin for me. For instance, I do *NOT* read the
newly created MOSS Wiki, but I *do* read email from the list. Call me
lazy, but it cuts me out from a portion of what's going on in that
community. Perhaps the net gain is better than the net loss, a
decision all communities or groups must make, but at some basic level,
I don't get Wiki. It seems to require that all posters be mini
WYSIWYG-webmasters-in-training and all that readers must continually
re-read content to discover what's changed. All seems like a waste of
human time for what computers do better.

P.P.S. I guess I've asked for it indirectly, so I'll ask dirctly --
Could someone clue me in on why Wiki is better than listserv, email
lists, news, SMTP, and NNTP, all of which are directed to my favorite,
familiar news/email readers (which I won't share the name of, because
it's not relevant to my argument -- lots of folks could substitute
their favorite news/email reader and make the same point).

An inquiring (underinformed) mind wants to know....

Yes, I have to admit my ignorance in order to satisfy my curiosity!

-- 
Michael R. Wolf
    All mammals learn by playing!
        MichaelRunningWolf at att.net