Etenne at 11:25, 13 April 2015

2015-04-13T11:25:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:25, 13 April 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Draft}}
	'''Crowd sourcing''' is, in theory, a superior way to utilize the expertise of large numbers of people in creating a better product. For example, it has been found to be quite useful in the creation of "open source" software.		'''Crowd sourcing''' is, in theory, a superior way to utilize the expertise of large numbers of people in creating a better product. For example, it has been found to be quite useful in the creation of "open source" software.

User4: Created page with "'''Crowd sourcing''' is, in theory, a superior way to utilize the expertise of large numbers of people in creating a better product. For example, it has been found to be quite..."

2015-03-28T04:32:21Z

Created page with "'''Crowd sourcing''' is, in theory, a superior way to utilize the expertise of large numbers of people in creating a better product. For example, it has been found to be quite..."

New page

'''Crowd sourcing''' is, in theory, a superior way to utilize the expertise of large numbers of people in creating a better product. For example, it has been found to be quite useful in the creation of "open source" software.

==Wikipedia==
Wikipedia is a good example of some of the problems that arise from "{{w|crowdsourcing}}". The quality of the articles published depends entirely on the expertise of the contributors -- or their lack of expertise -- as well as on each contributor's inherent biases.

==Groupthink and Pedophilia==
"{{w|Groupthink}}", one of the potential problems with crowd sourcing, is clearly evident in the production of the various "[[narrative]]s" relating to [[child sexual abuse]] and [[pedophilia]]. [[Psychobabble]] is employed by the so-called "child abuse experts," to obfuscate their genuine lack of knowledge of {{w|human sexuality}}, and, especially, [[child sexuality]]. The {{w|Bandwagon_effect|bandwagon effect}} can clearly be seen as everyone grabs their pitchforks, and jumps aboard the hay wagon on their way to storm the castle where the "monster pedophiles" live. After all, {{w|Argumentum_ad_populum|everyone already knows}} everything they need to know about the "problem".

==BoyWiki and crowd sourcing==
BoyWiki, too, suffers from the problems brought about by the "{{w|noble amateur}}" -- many who ''think'' they understand a problem are quick to jump in and '''''"be bold"''''' in their editing of articles, when the fact is that others -- who are much more knowledgeable on a topic -- should be given the major responsibility for the direction which articles take.

==See also==
[[psychobabble]]

==External links==
*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds
*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwagon_effect
*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_amateur
*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink
*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

Crowd sourcing - Revision history

Etenne at 11:25, 13 April 2015

User4: Created page with "'''Crowd sourcing''' is, in theory, a superior way to utilize the expertise of large numbers of people in creating a better product. For example, it has been found to be quite..."