<rss version="0.91"><channel>
<title>The law of the wiki</title>
<link>http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2005/10/the_law_of_the.php</link>
<description>The Register's Andrew Orlowski finds "encouraging signs from the Wikipedia project, where co-founder and überpedian Jimmy Wales has acknowledged there are real quality problems with the online work." Noting that up to now "criticism from outside the Wikipedia camp has been rebuffed with a ferocious blend of irrationality and vigor," Orlowski quotes from an October 6 post that Wales made in response to my criticism of Wikipedia's quality: "I don't agree with much of this...</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<item>
<title>teen sex</title>
<link>http://no.vinnica.ua/teen/</link>
<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://no.vinnica.ua/teen/">teen sex</a> <a href="http://no.vinnica.ua/teen/">teen sex</a> <a href="http://no.vinnica.ua/teen/">teen sex</a> <a href="http://no.vinnica.ua/teen/">teen sex</a>
]]></description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Agree to disagree</title>
<link>http://anne.teachesme.com/2005/10/20#a4486</link>
<description>I like James Robertson&apos;s take on wikipedia and finding truth .</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Interessant Wikipedia-diskusjon</title>
<link>http://www.espen.com/norskblogg/archives/2005/10/interessant_wik.html</link>
<description><![CDATA[Av og til blir jeg s&aring; sliten av korte argumenter i norske media.IT-avisen skriver en sak om at Wikipedia er s&oslash;ppel, (jpg) basert p&aring; hurtiglesing av en noks&aring; gjennomtenkt artikkel av Andrew Orlowski i The Register, hvor Jimmy &q...]]></description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Web2.0 repairs needed</title>
<link>http://www.internetplus.com/thefunkstop/?p=38</link>
<description>	In this article, the founder of Wikipedia admits to serious quality problems to one of the much evangelicasized (is that word??) services coming out of Web2.0.  I&amp;#8217;ve questioned Wikipedia for a while now.  Sure it is great to get a gist of a part...</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Nick Carr&apos;s Amorality</title>
<link>http://www.corante.com/many/archives/2005/10/20/nick_carrs_amorality.php</link>
<description> Cast aside the anti-hype rhetoric, and keep in mind it is an argument not of fact or policy, but value, and you will find Nicolas Carr&amp;#8217;s post on the amorality of Web 2.0 has a salient point &amp;#8212; that...</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Wiki bad or wiki good?</title>
<link>http://www.inkblurt.com/archives/296</link>
<description>	One problem with the participation model is that so much of it is fueled by idealists. Well, it&amp;#8217;s not totally a problem, because we need idealists. But it makes the &amp;#8220;movement&amp;#8221; behind the model seem naive to the more realistic and/or ...</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Does Wikipedia need editors?</title>
<link>http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/blogspotting/archives/2005/10/does_wikipedia.html</link>
<description>Nicholas Carr&apos;s skeptical posts about Wikipedia raise questions about media run by amateurs </description>
</item>
<item>
<title>The trade-off on Mediocrity</title>
<link>http://nitnblogs.blogspot.com/2005/10/trade-off-on-mediocrity.html</link>
<description>What you can do in order to save projects like the wikipedia from turning into moronic proclamations? One option, as Carr suggested, is to impose some form of centralized control. This is also what is done with open source projects, wherein a lot of ...</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>