Mea Culpa

I just got a well-deserved smack in the head from Lion Kimbro who takes exception at my characterization of the "difference between big public wiki sites and private group wikis (behind a secure firewall) as the same difference between a public restroom at a bus station and the bathroom in your home."

Lion just participated at RecentChangesCamp, a gathering of 150 or so really rabid wiki developers, and is a major contributor to CommunityWiki. Lion responded to my post with

So,... Public wiki, such as as CommunityWiki, will never be "amazingly effective in facilitating group activities," ..? Because it's public?

We're like "a public bathroom?"

Ouch.

OK, let me explain. I am writing for an audience that is very non-technical. Just ordinary folks working in large and small enterprises, shuttling their kids around to umpteen activities and organizations, and occasionally dedicating some time to a variety of volunteer, nonprofit endeavors. They rely on email and cell phones to stay connected.

This audience is largely unaware of wikis (and judging from my traffic stats, not too aware that I'm here either). Those that HAVE heard about wikis have done so largely through the media reporting about Wikipedia and, in particular, the recent John Siegenthaler episode. The audience I write for is involved in multiple activities (like you) but in a fairly private way, hence my focus on the 'private' wiki arena and occasional frustration at the 'public' wiki focus.

YOU guys (Lion and the small army of dedicated fanatics who develop this incredible stuff) have been using this for years and get it - intuitively. You live, eat, and breathe it (e.g. RecentChangesCamp). My intent is to promote what you guys have done an incredible job of creating - simple, seamless, enjoyable collaboration - to an audience that really needs it.

Now, for what it's worth, I have never trashed any public wiki - not even Wikipedia. In fact, I DO give a lot of positive comments to a lot of public wikis (see all those links over there on the right?). In fact, when I first started the 'Wiki of The Week' section I even mentioned "BTW, as I skim through these public sites, I’ve never seen any evidence of trashing or other abuse (mainstream media, please take note)."

Wikipedia and other large, well-known sites validate what you've been doing and you have a vested interest in keeping the content current, relevant, and .... um, what's the word.... oh, accurate ;) And, yes, it is. It's not a big, dirty, public bathroom. I was just trying to use a metaphor to provide a different perspective to an audience that doesn't quite get it ... yet.

I guess a better metaphor would have been comparing public and private wikis to Times Square and one's living room. There was a time (I know, I used to work there) when you wouldn't even think of bringing your family to Times Square. Now, with some focused attention, it's down right family friendly.

Obviously, public wikis like CommunityWiki are 'amazingly effective in facilitating group activities' - for the right audience. That's not happening yet for the majority of the population - not yet, anyway.

My characterization was for an audience that needs this tool but is getting the wrong perception about wiki. That perception creates an obstacle to adoption. And that perception is NOT the fault of Wikipedia, contributors, or developers. Frankly, I fault the media (both the tech AND the MSM) for its absolutely lousy, shallow approach to reporting. They all take the easy way out to get a story written. In effect, when the MSM writes about wiki, the universally cited example is Wikipedia. Ipso facto, wiki = Wikipedia.

My focus is on the secure, 'behind-the-firewall' wiki that small groups of collaborative people can use the tool to facilitate some desired outcome. Their groups, activities, and initiatives are typically pretty private affairs - hands-on, feet-on-the-ground 'activities that need planning, people, resources, and communication that websites, email, and cumbersome 'web 1.0' tools don't facilitate. Wiki does.

So, I apologize for the poor choice of an analogy. I envy what you guys do - I just want to bring it to the masses. People like me need what people like you do. I write for the one audience, but I hope you guys keep stopping by to add your insight (and keep me honest).

Comments

[Mark]

for the record -

I think your site is great, it was talked about a bit in different convos at RecentChangesCamp as a positive place!

AND

perhaps as many as 1/3 of the people at RecentChangeCamp had very little experience with a wiki, not even understanding or ever used a wiki page. They were there because of the community building aspect of the conference. It was great to see some of them grasp the idea! Best, Mark

[kris olsen]

Mark - I have wondered at times if I was just a tree falling in the forest with no one there to hear it. Nice to hear people are talking about it, especially at a venue like RCC (sorry I missed it, BTW). Thanks for the compliment.

Ted Ernst also made a point about the mix of tech/non-tech folks at RCC - I guess I need to stop making these broad generalizations and assumptions :-\

[Lion Kimbro]

{:)}=

Okay!

[Ronnie G]

I must take exception to the person who took exception with the rest room analogy. I read the explanation and thought what a great way to reduce this to something that everyone can understand. No apology was needed!