What might *really* be wrong w/the Codex: it isn't like Wikipedia
Yesterday I posted a blog about what I feel might be a fundamental problem with the Codex, and the feedback was pretty negative. I've now come to realize that I arrived at that thinking by trying to rationalize the discipline that Wikipedia has with all their policies, which don't seem to make a lot of sense to me.
Like I said, Wikipedia has all these policies, and I don't see why they are necessary. I do feel that the WP guys know something at that we don't, and I'd like to know what that is. In trying to work out how material could be objectionable, when it isn't erroneous, speculative, subjective, profane, defamatory or giving away of state secrets, I came to realize that it might be in publishing spoilers and proto-spoilers. This was the…
Taking all the mystery out of Ultima
I'm thinking of formally taking up this concern in a public forum, but the reason I'm so tentative is that this is a very fundamental issue, and could only be resolved with the vaguest of guidelines.
- 1 What I thought I wanted for the Codex
- 2 What I think we're doing to the Codex
- 2.1 It's not quite a spoiler
- 2.2 So what do we do about it?
- 3 Conclusion
- 4 Edit:
I think we are all here for just about the same reason, and that's the reason I outline on my user page. That view is that the goodness that is Ultima should be perpetuated in the Codex, and it should be made attractive. At that time I had the naive view that whatever made the Codex look good, made Ultima look good, but I've come to develop a more refined view of this, which is that we can make the Co…