Status:. Closed most open tasks on wiki. Need to write one REALLY old report on ru.wikibooks. I'm still around, but at a very much reduced activity level.
/Lost functionalities. Contrary to what you might expect, Wikipedia has lost several functions and abilities over time. Here's a list.
The digital ice age <- however, the solutions proposed here can at times be illegal. (except if you were backing up most wikipedias, of course. Except en.wikipedia, technically.)
User:Demi/SuperTextPopupHistoryAnnotate. The name sucks. The description of the idea sucks. But if you manage to read it anyway, the actual described concept rocks. I wonder if I could try this at some point? USC now has implemented something...
that might interact in an interesting way with this - USC's system color-codes an article according to the "trustworthiness" of its author as determined by how long that author's edits tend to last... Demi's proposal would change the dynamics of how long an author's edits would tend to stick around, so watching the interactions between the two systems would be terrifically amusing. <- mel's writing ;-)
who runs wikipedia , rereading some of Aaron Swartz's writing. His thoughts are spot on. :-)
effect of voice chat on games - "Those who used text-only chat experienced 'drops in trust and happiness' amongst their fellow players; those who used voice chat did not.". This also works in other online communities. Mediation becomes a lot easier with voice available.
OODA_Loop, I often try to work quicky, and get inside other people's decision cycle. Originally this is a method designed for warfare to confuse people and force them to mis-react. You can also turn it around and use it to enlighten people, and cause them to react well. I worry that sometimes perhaps I don't quite manage to pull that off.
User:Zenwhat/Sandbox Ooh, very pretty, I hope it shows up in mainspace. How many people put that much work into anything? --Kim Bruning (talk) 13:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC) Awwww, where did that go?
