|
|
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
ericdittmar
Posts:3
 |
| 04/13/2007 5:14 PM |
 Alert
|
I have a few questions, comments, and ideas about how to improve this project.
1. Currently, the introductory letter suggests that this project is open to the Wharton and MIT Sloan communities. If this is not the case we should change that verbage, because as it reads now it would discourage others from joining the commmunity. If in fact this project is only open to the two business schools, then I propopse that we open the membership. Not everyone wants to be a part of an online community project, and I doubt we will get enough participants from the two schools to make the project successful. Encouraging anyone to participate should help us find those people that are willing and most capable of contributing to the effort.
2. In the community proposal (I believe) contributors are asked not to edit without the permission of the topic owner. This is stupid. The whole point of a wiki is for people to contribute however, whenever, wherever they wish. We can recover past versions of a topic (right?). People should be ENCOURAGED to edit, add to, and modify the work of others.
3. The way I understand it, this project is geared such that everyone generates of content, and then a group of selected individuals will edit the book before it is published. I find this incredibly mundane.
What is so exciting about asking business school students to generate content, such that a handful of assignees can review and edit this work? I fail to see how this is a collective intelligence project at all. What would be far more interesting would be to discover if a community can not only generate content (fairly well established), but edit that content as well. Can a group of people write with one voice? I say we find out.
4. I suggest that we do away with chapters for now, or at least put them aside. Let's not suffocate creativity. Let people find or add topics and contribute as they see fit. We can link topics together into chapters later. My guess is that the final output will be far more interesting that way (note, I would NEVER buy a book with the chapter headings we have now).
|
|
|
|
|
barry
Posts:72
|
| 04/23/2007 12:10 AM |
Alert
|
Eric
your comments are very intersesting. we have tried a number of iterations along the way - some of the approaches you note above are a result of other criticisms of the project. stay tuned - we are about to change the overall strutcure to gain more momentum. thanks for your support.
Barry |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|