Talk:Idea policy: Difference between revisions

From OLPC
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(request general feedback re: how to use this wiki)
 
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
neutral discussion requested to discover
=idea policy=

this is a neutral discussion to discover
how general users of this wiki want
how general users of this wiki want
ideas here to be suggested and specified..
ideas here to be suggested and specified
if a purpose of this wiki is to solicit
ideas which may help kids use the OLPC 2B1
to "learn learning".. is it doing its job?
''could it do its job any better?'' how?


=idea policy=
==example==


[http://wiki.laptop.org/index.php?title=AbiWord&diff=prev&oldid=11595 195.16.185.35] edits this wiki as if policy is:
pages related to [[twext]] were deleted by
• NO SPAM
an [[Special:Contributions&target=195.16.185.35&offset=0&limit=500|anonymous user]], (who apparently
• ONE PAGE PER IDEA
rewrote [http://wiki.laptop.org/index.php?title=AbiWord&diff=prev&oldid=11595 this page] as well)..
• NO MAKING UP NAMES FOR IDEAS
• NO LINKING FROM REQUESTS FOR LINKS and
• NO OPINIONS
?is this the official position of the OLPC team
two questions for users of this wiki:
or a minority opinion of users of this wiki?
if one purpose of this wiki is to solicit
2. why be anonymous here?
ideas to help kids using OLPC 2B1 to
"learn learning", maybe a clearly defined
[[idea policy]] could encourage more ideas?
==no spam?==
1. do users prefer pages ''on this wiki''

to further explain new ideas that might
are commercial ideas completely prohibited here?
be useful to kids, OLPC and 2B1?
are "[http://www.wikia.com/wiki/Open_company_test open]" commercial ideas any more welcome than
examples: [http://wiki.laptop.org/index.php?title=Chunk&diff=13577&oldid=13261 chunk] [http://wiki.laptop.org/index.php?title=Twexter&diff=prev&oldid=11891 twexter] [http://wiki.laptop.org/index.php?title=MuT&diff=13578&oldid=13262 mut]
"closed" commercial ideas? clearly, spams sucks so:
benefit: duh
or do you prefer ''only links to external'' sites
as [[Talk:Main_Page#re:_about_this_wiki|advocated]] by above anonymous user?
cost: some good ideas might not get here


==one page per idea?==
: note: i'm not at all interested in having it ''my way'' here.. rather, i just want to learn how to be helpful.. thanks


one page per idea limits new ideas to one
: opinion: 195.16.185.35 is right that multiple pages may be too much and that spam surely is wrong.. on the other hand, how can the public feel safe to add ideas here? does 195.16.185.35 authoritively speak for the OLPC team? One purpose of [[Home|this wiki]] is to collect free ideas possibly useful to OLPC/kids, correct?
page.. links to other websites are encouraged
to flesh out the ideas..
benefit: possible infoglut on this wiki is
reduced, in case that is a current problem..
cost: not all such other websites have public
feedback loops available.. feedback possibly useful
to OLPC is either lost or found, to a lesser extent,
elsewhere..


==no making up names for ideas?==
: there are many empty requests on this wiki collecting relatively few ideas from the general public.. might some kinda '''[[idea policy|idea policy]]''' encourage participation in this wiki, thus better collect free ideas? [[User:Duke|Duke]] 15:56, 18 October 2006 (EDT)
[[Talk:The_OLPC_Wiki#re: about this wiki|195.16.185.35]] claims making up names is
MARKETING and thus grounds for removal of ideas..
seems a little exagerated..
benefit: ?
cost: difficult to describe new ideas with old names

==no linking from requests for links?==

aka "no spamming all over wiki"..
there are many pages requesting links to ideas
that might help kids use OLPC to "learn learning",
but linking an idea to such requests seems futile,
as such links seem likely to be removed..
benefit: restrains public from abusing this wiki
as means to promote perhaps selfish interests..
(whatever that means)..
cost: casual users of this wiki might not learn
of possibly good ideas kids might use to learn
learning.
==no opinions?==
restricting articles to facts asserts a strategy
that is proven effective for wikipedia, which
also bans "original research".. but will "facts-only"
bias effectively discover new tools for learners?
<!--
facts may help people develop new ideas, but good
ideas may also result from opinions, even passions -->
benefit: facts-only restricts ideas collected here
to peer-reviewed-only "safe" information.. no need
to sort through "new" ideas
cost: some yet-to-be-reviewed ideas may not be
considered, even though they may effectively be
used to help kids "learn learning".. facts-only
might throw cold water on new creative solutions
=examples=
here a couple of ideas that, in one awful selfish
opinion, could B.) benefit from exposure to public
feedback using the OLPC wiki and A.) grow to be
a lot of fun for kids to learn with:
==olpcities==
[[olpcities]] describes an idea to provide
a fun interface for kids to "homestead" on
the OLPC network..
olpcities contributed several pages to specify
the proposal, but the supplemental pages were
removed by 195.16.185.35
==wixi==
[[twext]] tried to further specify a [[wixi]] DIFF
proposal for a multilingual language learning
interface on a wiki platform.. removed by
195.16.185.35.. a less biased approach is
now attempted at [[talk:language methods]]
=action=
[[idea policy]] or whatever you wanna call it
might be useful to define parameters to encourage
public to contribute ideas on this wiki
benefit: get more ideas kids might use (while
spending less time weeding out inappropriate
ideas or links)
cost: a moment to clearly specify how you want
this wiki used to collect free public ideas

Revision as of 16:39, 24 October 2006

neutral discussion requested to discover how general users of this wiki want ideas here to be suggested and specified

idea policy

195.16.185.35 edits this wiki as if policy is: 
• NO SPAM
• ONE PAGE PER IDEA 
• NO MAKING UP NAMES FOR IDEAS
• NO LINKING FROM REQUESTS FOR LINKS and
• NO OPINIONS

?is this the official position of the OLPC team
or a minority opinion of users of this wiki?

if one purpose of this wiki is to solicit 
ideas to help kids using OLPC 2B1 to
"learn learning", maybe a clearly defined
idea policy could encourage more ideas?

no spam?

are commercial ideas completely prohibited here?
are "open" commercial ideas any more welcome than
"closed" commercial ideas? clearly, spams sucks so:

benefit: duh

cost: some good ideas might not get here

one page per idea?

one page per idea limits new ideas to one
page.. links to other websites are encouraged
to flesh out the ideas..

benefit: possible infoglut on this wiki is
reduced, in case that is a current problem..

cost: not all such other websites have public 
feedback loops available.. feedback possibly useful
to OLPC is either lost or found, to a lesser extent, 
elsewhere..

no making up names for ideas?

195.16.185.35 claims making up names is 
MARKETING and thus grounds for removal of ideas..
seems a little exagerated..

benefit: ?

cost: difficult to describe new ideas with old names

no linking from requests for links?

aka "no spamming all over wiki".. 

there are many pages requesting links to ideas 
that might  help kids use OLPC to "learn learning",
but linking an idea to such requests seems futile,
as such links seem likely to be removed..

benefit: restrains public from abusing this wiki
as means to promote perhaps selfish interests..
(whatever that means)..

cost: casual users of this wiki might not learn
of possibly good ideas kids might use to learn
learning.

no opinions?

restricting articles to facts asserts a strategy
that is proven effective for wikipedia, which 
also bans "original research".. but will "facts-only" 
bias effectively discover new tools for learners?

benefit: facts-only restricts ideas collected here 
to peer-reviewed-only "safe" information.. no need
to sort through "new" ideas

cost: some yet-to-be-reviewed ideas may not be 
considered, even though they may effectively be
used to help kids "learn learning".. facts-only 
might throw cold water on new creative solutions

examples

here a couple of ideas that, in one awful selfish 
opinion, could B.) benefit from exposure to public 
feedback using the OLPC wiki and A.) grow to be 
a lot of fun for kids to learn with:

olpcities

olpcities describes an idea to provide
a fun interface for kids to "homestead" on
the OLPC network.. 

olpcities contributed several pages to specify
the proposal, but the supplemental pages were 
removed by 195.16.185.35

wixi

twext tried to further specify a wixi DIFF
proposal for a multilingual language learning
interface on a wiki platform.. removed by 
195.16.185.35.. a less biased approach is 
now attempted at talk:language methods

action

idea policy or whatever you wanna call it
might be useful to define parameters to encourage
public to contribute ideas on this wiki

benefit: get more ideas kids might use (while
spending less time weeding out inappropriate
ideas or links) 

cost: a moment to clearly specify how you want 
this wiki used to collect free public ideas
Retrieved from "http://wiki.laptop.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Talk:Idea_policy&oldid=14306"