User talk:Connelly Barnes: Difference between revisions
imported>Connelly Barnes m (respond to L. Sanger) |
imported>Connelly Barnes m (edit discussion with larry sanger) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Just some friendly food for thought now. You say: "That said, I don't consider degrees, accolades, or reputation to have anything to do with expertise, and so for this Encyclopedia's sake I'd encourage people to judge expertise by the "hacker criterion:" work done (in the given field)." Isn't the years of work it takes to earn a degree "work done (in the given field)" as you say? Aren't the vast majority of accolades and reputations earned on the basis of work done in the field? If you admit that, and you also admit that work done in a given field is relevant to expertise in that field, then are you not contradicting yourself? We might continue in the discussion forums (link to the left under "communication"). --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 23:05, 27 January 2007 (CST) | Just some friendly food for thought now. You say: "That said, I don't consider degrees, accolades, or reputation to have anything to do with expertise, and so for this Encyclopedia's sake I'd encourage people to judge expertise by the "hacker criterion:" work done (in the given field)." Isn't the years of work it takes to earn a degree "work done (in the given field)" as you say? Aren't the vast majority of accolades and reputations earned on the basis of work done in the field? If you admit that, and you also admit that work done in a given field is relevant to expertise in that field, then are you not contradicting yourself? We might continue in the discussion forums (link to the left under "communication"). --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 23:05, 27 January 2007 (CST) | ||
Aha, you can ignore my post to your blog, as I guess you responded here more quickly than I expected. Sure I'll continue in the discussion forums. - [[User:Connelly Barnes|Connelly Barnes]] 23:27, 27 January 2007 (CST) | |||
See [http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,492.0.html]. - [[User:Connelly Barnes|Connelly Barnes]] 00:26, 28 January 2007 (CST) | |||
Latest revision as of 00:26, 28 January 2007
| Citizendium Getting Started | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Quick Start | About us | Help system | Start a new article | For Wikipedians | |||
Tasks: start a new article • add basic, wanted or requested articles • add definitions • add metadata • edit new pages
Welcome to the Citizendium! We hope you will contribute boldly and well. Here are pointers for a quick start, and see Getting Started for other helpful "startup" links, our help system and CZ:Home for the top menu of community pages. You can test out editing in the sandbox if you'd like. If you need help to get going, the forum is one option. That's also where we discuss policy and proposals. You can ask any user or the editors for help, too. Just put a note on their "talk" page. Again, welcome and have fun! --Larry Sanger 23:00, 27 January 2007 (CST)
Just some friendly food for thought now. You say: "That said, I don't consider degrees, accolades, or reputation to have anything to do with expertise, and so for this Encyclopedia's sake I'd encourage people to judge expertise by the "hacker criterion:" work done (in the given field)." Isn't the years of work it takes to earn a degree "work done (in the given field)" as you say? Aren't the vast majority of accolades and reputations earned on the basis of work done in the field? If you admit that, and you also admit that work done in a given field is relevant to expertise in that field, then are you not contradicting yourself? We might continue in the discussion forums (link to the left under "communication"). --Larry Sanger 23:05, 27 January 2007 (CST)
Aha, you can ignore my post to your blog, as I guess you responded here more quickly than I expected. Sure I'll continue in the discussion forums. - Connelly Barnes 23:27, 27 January 2007 (CST)
See [1]. - Connelly Barnes 00:26, 28 January 2007 (CST)