Lamb says that there is a common reaction to wikis, "That looks promising, but it can't work for me...If anybody can edit my text, then anybody can ruin my text."

However, it is understood that a wiki is a tool for collaboration. Some writers fear collaboration while others embrace and are excited by it.

Where as the collaboration style on a wiki may be different form the chit chatting done in real life, it is still a community. A level of trust is maintained in this community, and it is expected to make changes and additions, respectfully, to othersÂ’ work.

When it comes to conflict inside the wiki community, it is often due to differences in perception: The amount of our knowledge that lies in the grey area, can often times cause discrepancies. One may think they are offering helpful criticism to an author, while at the time the author thinks they are being insulted.

We can, however, hope that through this wikis will help us to acknowledge other perceptions as well as our own, and help us to collaborate and in the end have a better product that what we could produce alone.

All in all, it seems decided that if you are going to fundamentally object with the way wikis work, then they probably arenÂ’t for you.

SharonSimpson, SueCutler, AspenEasterling, GretaColburn

Though i think a wiki is a great way to collaborate knowledge and opinions, at times it can be troublesome as well. Can you imagine, writing a whole piece of work and at the end get it ruined by someone who doesn't even know about the topic. Not many people can be trusted in not changing the piece you wrote. I'm not against wikis, but there is definitely pros and cons. An article written by Inkblurt discusses the good and bad of a wiki. I think it's an interesting article. Yes a wiki can generate different ideas from different people, like the quote goes 'two minds think greater than one' but at times it can turn out to be nasty.
There are no comments on this page.
Valid XHTML :: Valid CSS: :: Powered by WikkaWiki