University of Canberra/RCC2011/Let's reverse-brainstorm: Why wikis don't work


 * 1) people have different goals & in a wiki people have to collaborate & they do it better on their own
 * 2) too hard to use (info architecture, structuring)
 * 3) we don’t have the skills
 * 4) ugly
 * 5) Unreliable technology
 * 6) People won’t agree
 * 7) it is public, the permanency frightens people & functions
 * 8) WE have enough info out there (google)
 * 9) too much time, too busy, sb else can do it
 * 10) wikis are messy
 * 11) what’s the point if it gets changed anyway
 * 12) lack of facilitation
 * 13) people want control over content, they want power
 * 14) you challenge people’s world view in a wiki
 * 15) Stepping backwards (ie. categories, they are really sophisticated taxonomies out there)
 * 16) Tech is poor
 * 17) lack of good tagging
 * 18) readability
 * 19) vandalism
 * 20) wordpress is much easier

What is a wiki?
Core features to a wiki: participation – you meet sb via an edit, complete history about the changes => accountability, creates a sense of ownership
 * 1) primacy of authorship (people want their own spaces)
 * 2) Solo-isolation of content
 * 3) People don’t get it, wikis are full of pdfs
 * 4) You can’t see how it works compared to blogs, twitter. You instantly see how it works
 * 5) lack of trust (in content) & legitimacy in large orgs
 * 6) fear

Why do wikis work?

 * 1) creative process
 * 2) Once sb gets over fear, people start participating
 * 3) Trainspotting phenomenon
 * 4) Wikis harness accuracy
 * 5) low entry barrier, 2 secs to edit
 * 6) I can create a structure that I want

Sidetrack Wikipedia: Why Wikipedia is going to fail?
The correct question is if it is going to fail before it is fixed?
 * 1) Achievements: WP build a comprehensive database about academic journals
 * 2) Since wp, I am frustrated that I can’t edit Sydney Morning Herald online
 * 3) Success of WP was good PR