Lex Spoon wrote:

> Editors, yes.  But why does it need to be controlled?  IMHO, let's just
> try it with volunteer editors (whoever first goes to the Swiki and
> starts organizing things), and then see if we run into any serious
> disagreements.
>
> One thing that Wiki and Swikis have shown, is that leaving control wide
> open can really work in a lot of circumstances.  In many groups--even in
> classrooms where students are competing with each other--people just
> don't screw up each others' work.

But doesn't that in fact contribute to the problem?...people don't feel that
they should significantly re-organize other people's contributions.
Therefore, we get many names for the same thing (goodies, tools, packages),
things scattered...important things buried and not so important things in an
inappropriate place, inconsistent verbage and navigation, etc.

As for the issue of being controlled, I think it's needed for the same
reason that www.squeak.org is controlled.  Which begs the question, why is
it controlled?  Perhaps some other people could give some good reasons for
this.  I think there is a need for both squeak.org and a wide open Swiki.
And, I think what people are arguing is the squeak.org (and possible the
Swiki) should be more friendly to the newbie as well as better organized for
the expert.

- Stephen