One of the SisterSites
of Wiki, Why was originally set up to take debate related to Christianity from Wiki. It aimed to have an articulate, geeky, socially aware, spiritually sensitive, witty yet scholarly flavor. We were even looking for people with those qualities. The Why pages remain as tokens of an interesting experiment, for exploration by wiki archaeologists. http://clublet.com/why
links to some suggested StartingPoints
. Past topics can also be seen through:
This new report is much more useful for discovering the better parts of WhyHistory
. Click on the icon to the right of any page name to keep delving. DecentChanges
as someone once memorably put it, an accidental MorphemeSwitch
we still treasure. WhyIsNowClosed
until some time in 2004. Any questions to RichardDrake
The considered view?
It ended up seeming, at least to some former participants, cheeky, condescending, hostile to all but a very select few, and hopelessly stuck in enormously detailed contemplation of sentimental trivia about the host's favorite historical figures (primarily WinstonChurchill
The rest is WhyHistory
Open and shut case?
12-15-2004 Why appears to be open again, but I do not like log-in or the "Application To Edit" process. Have "applied" to edit, will see what happens.
For some value of open. RichardDrakes view of a wiki is radically different to that of most of the rest of us. Effectively he is retaining GodKing rights.
Indeed, this does seem to be the case.
Yet Richard himself asked WhyWhyClosed in December, assuming that it still was. For some value of closed.
indeed. Ha! I'll believe that when I see it.
Well, we've now done enough on the reparations front I feel. But I've come to feel the whole idea of the ReopeningOfWhy
is faulty too. Why is never going to be as open as this Wiki was when we took off in 2000 - or even to the extent Wikipedia is today. My firm intention is that we'll remain a ThrottledWiki
, a lighthearted term of DeliberateAmbiguity
for something that may have revved up to thousands, or revved down to one or no users in 2010, say.
What I am saying, today, is let WhyRestart
. What that means, for sure, is
- I have started to edit Why again, after a more than a month's break
- I have started to encourage selected previous editors from the past six months to make thoughtful, provocative contributions from different viewpoints, in line with our ancient aspiration of being a PluralismWorkshop
- I'll respond to some - by no means all - of those who've made a past ApplicationToEdit. After the same kind of interview process I applied to JackRice and KasiaDymara earlier this year, some will no doubt be let in. (And how worthwhile that turned out to be in the case of the sceptical ex-Oxford historian and the devout Polish mathematician. That gives me confidence that almost anything may happen in the future.)
- I hereby invite those interested in taking part to email me at richard at clublets.com
What does a WhyRestart
mean beyond that? They'll be more on the TopicalThemes
that currently have my attention - for example the MakePovertyHistory
campaign and the crisis in the EuropeanUnion
- on the WhyRestart
page by Monday. We'll never forget the core issue of developing a credible HypothesisOfJesus
- indeed multiple competing theses. Clearly we think ThePoliticsOfJesus
is important, or we'd not be trying to cover both areas. Or would we?
Whatever the user base turns out to be in 2010, let me finish with a big thank you to all those who have made such fascinating contributions on worldview matters on Why and on c2, words that have both caused me to think and enriched me. -- RichardDrake
So why are you still in the business of bragging here ? What you did was considered by many the greatest deceipt in the history of wikidom since people came from C2 wiki and contributed to your site with a certain expectation, only for you to change the rules at a whim, and without any accountability whatsoever to the people who put some effort to make WhyClublet the limited success that it was at some point in time.
Anyways, you can do what you please with WhyClublet, but I demand of you to delete the page CostinCozianu from your site, as a matter of simply proving your honesty in the business of running a wiki that is even a SisterSite. It is linked from this site, and when I made the mistake of adding it to your site, I would never have dreamt that one day editing my own page in a SisterSite would require your approval. I read comments from other people who were just as puzzled that they couldn't edit their pages, so if I were you, I would certainly try to remove everything that was not contributed by the currently approved editors, but then again, it's not my business. I'll be thankful if you deleted my page, and after you do that you could delete this comment as well. --CostinCozianu
I have to be honest that such demands for deletion have seldom been met. In fact the word 'never' comes to mind, although my memory is not what it was. There was no bragging that I was aware of. -- RichardDrake
Of course such comments were not posted on WhyClublet for obvious reasons, and the concept of writing an email to the operator of a wiki is so foreign to wiki culture, that you should consider your duty to be forthcoming and clarify the situation and not just consideer that if you don't get any email that means you have a tacit approval from past contributors to keep texts on the site. I mean I know quite a few people who were reluctant to write an email to Ward, of all people, after their IPs have been caught in the crossfire.
A question then about wiki culture
. Are the concerns you raise about the two wikis and their relationship more important to you than, say, the effort to MakePovertyHistory
in the RealWorld
being emphasized so strongly today? That - and related matters of truthfulness of politicians and people in the West - is, as I tried to make clear, what prompted me to announce the WhyRestart
. Pace what you said about deceit, I have been totally honest about what I have been seeking to do with Why at every stage. I have also been clear about what I have not been prepared to do, as protection from limitless unpaid responsibilities and criticisms. It is fine that your concerns be expressed on this page on Wiki. And I have made time to read and hereby to wish you well. But ... compared to other issues in the world and in my life personally, I have to say it all seems a very small matter. True culture is meant to support and enable real and fruitful relationships between human beings. I trust that you find lasting friends and causes that make this true for you. Not being able to take part in Why Clublet and having a few unwanted historic links to it on Wiki is not the biggest challenge facing a human being this Saturday morning. -- Richard
Well, Richard, it is unlikely that you yourself will MakePovertyHistory, even unlikely that you'll make as much a dent as MotherTheresa?, so why not start the good deeds trail with responding to my request ? It only takes you a few seconds. You can make it a better world one step at a time. And of many people who commented unfavorably your decisions, I distinctly remeber AonghusOhAlmhain expressing the same shock at the idea that he put a personal page on your wiki, only to find himself unable to edit it or do anything about it, you might want to contact him as well, and ask how he would like this situation rectified. And while for me or probably for Aonghus the situation is merely an unpleasant annoyance, there are others that have been quite wronged by your conduct in operating WhyClublet, you may take a little pause for reflection what you'll do about other more complex situations as well.
I see we've migrated from "considered by many the greatest deceit in the history of wikidom" to an "unpleasant annoyance" for two people. And then unnamed others who were "quite wronged". And then "more complex situations" on which I am to reflect. After that no doubt we would be back to "remove everything that was not contributed by the currently approved editors". Piece of string and longitude come firmly to mind. But there's a more basic problem.
You see, I don't accept any of these solemn moral obligations at all. I never promised anyone that from the moment they came onto Why and announced their name as X then page X and all our other pages were theirs to edit for the rest of time. Presumably, if I had promised this to each newcomer, it would also be my responsibility to make sure that nobody ever impersonated them on Why. How are you suggesting that I would achieve that?
- Well, WhyClublet benefitted from a lot of energy spent by some wiki contributors. You later ban some of them. Now I have a hard time figuring it out how those contributors would have spent the same energy with the same enthusiasm to make WhyClublet into the limited success that it once was, had you made it clear that you were to subsequently ban them and use their work at your sole discretion. Of course, you weren't planning to ban them, but since it so happened that you took that decision, then it rests upon you the responsibility to make sure that they are OK with you keeping their contributions while banning them. Of course, you can deny that burden, as it seems you are doing it in this conversation, but it's simply a matter of avoiding even the appearance of impropriety, and if you profess to promote a christian worldview then not only you wouldn't want to wrong other people, but you wouldn't want as much as other people having something to repproach to you if there's at least something left that you can do to improve the situation.
No sane person would take on such limitless responsibilities for no remuneration for the rest of time. So I didn't. This is the not-so-complex situation that I suggest you reflect on.
Here's another question. Why should you
take precedence over everyone else? Why should that first step for me becoming like MotherTeresa
be to make you
completely happy about what you consider your
pages and your
text on WhyClublet
. I don't know you. You may even turn out not to be wholly reasonable. Why should this be the place to start? Or any other.
Even so, in the spirit of amused experimentation and in pursuit of Saint Teresaness I do now offer one small step. I am prepared to CutYourTieToWhy?
. As long as you convince me beyond reasonable doubt that you are the CostinCozianu
who has edited Wiki and Why under that name, ever since that UserName
and/or signature was first used here (a date would be nice), and that you thereby guarantee and indemnify me against any other CostinCozianu
's arising to dispute this important truth, I will remove your name from the list of pages that Wiki takes from Why that generates the graphic link under your name page here to the one you cannot edit on Why.
How does that sound? -- RichardDrake
Well, Richard, you can do the right thing, or you can find excuses, or you can even try to play games while finding excuses. The choice is yours. --CostinCozianu
Richard, I don't know if you ever read this and I don't know about the US, but in whole Europe you'd be obligated
to delete content written by others, since its theirs, if they didn't assign copyright to you explicitly - and even then, you still must
delete personal content, not only on request, but on doubt that the represented person may not like to have this info online - and, of course, Costin is right: Its your minimum moral obligation
to delete what he wrote and personal information on request.