Documentary [ TRAILER ] “There’s anonymity,” says Wikipedia’s Jimmy Wales, “and then there’s real names and in the middle somewhere there’s pseudonymity — where you have a pseudonym, but it’s a stable identity and you are willing to stand behind it. You generate a reputation. That’s very different from anonymity, which is really about hit-and-run, where everyday you are a different person and everyday you have a different name.”

Why should your real name matter? What really matters is the work you’ve done.


FEATURED IMAGE CREDIT: s.yume

Tagged on:

7 thoughts on “Truth in Numbers

  • November 10, 2010 at 4:01 pm
    Permalink

    I can see why there might be a rumor going around that “Jimbo” Wales has made a deal with Google to get Wikipedia listed somewhere in the top three slots of every Google. Wales denies it, and I think we can see how it might have happened organically, if Wikipedia is indeed the second most read publication in human history.

    Reply
  • November 10, 2010 at 5:39 pm
    Permalink

    I believe it. We used it all the time on The G. Of course there’s plenty of rubbish in there, you can’t just blindly quote from it. But when it comes to covering your bases, when you’re collaboratively problem solving and you want to make sure that if people don’t know what you’re talking about, they can just click through to the wiki, it’s an incredible time-saver.

    Reply
  • November 15, 2010 at 10:52 am
    Permalink

    What does it matter if we know the name of the Editor of the New York Times? 

    Reply
  • November 16, 2010 at 6:19 am
    Permalink

    I’d have to agree, when it comes to modern accountability, Wikipedia is out there defining the new standard.

    Just think of all those Germans looking over your shoulder! Anyone could call you to the plate and anyone could call anyone who called you to the plate to the plate.

    World Class Due Diligence. Plus lots of crap — to keep you on your toes.

    Reply
  • November 17, 2010 at 10:29 am
    Permalink

    It’s true. There’s an anthropological attitude that can be very transformative, although you might have to be a frequent flyer. Sometimes an entry is so revisionist, it’s better to leave it untouched, and create another entry, with a slightly different name, to treat the same issue with a different spin.

    Reply
  • November 17, 2010 at 4:32 pm
    Permalink

    Just don’t forget to embed a clue in the smoking petuta.

    Reply
  • November 17, 2010 at 4:40 pm
    Permalink

    If you haven’t seen his TED, you wouldn’t want to have missed it.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *