HomoEconomus

The free, open, collaborative web-based Wikipedia encyclopedia has come of age. Its founder, Jimmy Wales, has said he will impose stricter editorial rules -- including a committee for freezing "undisputed" content -- to counter vandalism of the site. (The Wikipedia itself notes that vandalism has been a "constant problem".)

Of course, if Wikipedia were an ordinary, privately compiled encyclopedia, this would already be standard procedure. To be effective, someone, in the end, must exercise ownership of the project. But the need for centralized editorial oversight at Wikipedia exposes the soft, white underbelly of the open/collaborative movement. Wikipedia's management struggles with the notion in a semantical two-step:

Wikipedia articles are not controlled by any particular user or editorial group, and decision-making on the content and editorial policies of Wikipedia is instead done by consensus and occasionally vote, though Jimmy Wales retains final judgment.

Contributors to Wikipedia, according to its policies, are supposed to maintain a "neutral point of view" when writing, so that, ideally, Wikipedia fairly represents "all views on an issue, attributed to their adherents in a neutral way." The notion of an editorial committee deciding which content is undisputed appears to undermine the Wikipedia ideal and violate Wikipedia's own rules; namely, that Wikipedia does not declare any article finished, and that views be given equal weight to their popularity.

The editorial committee may be able to distinguish undisputed content from marginalized viewpoints, much like Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart claimed he could do with pornography. But one man's content freezing is another man's censorship. Open collaboration comes of age. --GAHJr