[Lincs] Wiki

[Dave Rice]

Alan Pope wrote:

>On 26/09/05, iain Baker <iain.dbaker at gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>My vote is that the current wikki certainly be retired... as a
>>replacement my vote would be along the lines of the set-up at
>>www.lancastriaplayers.co.uk ... basically you can input if you get an
>>account! the webmaster gives each member the relevent priveledges
>>(standard priveledges are for the forum... additional priveledges are
>>given to comittee members for file uploads and news etc)... just a
>>thought
>>
>>    
>>
>
>The problem with sites which require authentication to be able to
>modify is that well, they require authentication to modify. If (as is
>the case with wikis) you don't *require* it then people are able to
>casually edit pages to add or modify existing content without having
>yet another password to remember. There is also the issue of people
>being unable to register when the webmaster is awol/on
>holiday/otherwise busy. With a wiki anyone can edit at any time.
>
>We've found at the Hampshire LUG that having an open wiki allows
>anyone from anywhere to edit unhindered (subject to certain anti-spam
>controls). We have had people from Sweden recently for example correct
>something on our wiki. We have new member of the LUG join and have the
>same level of access as someone who has been in the LUG for years. By
>adding a level of web admin to the site you foster a tiered structure
>to what is in effect a flat community.
>
>Having seen the wiki work for LUGs like Hants, Surrey and Wolves, and
>non-LUG sites such as Blitzed (the irc network that is connected with
>lug.org.uk), and wikipedia, I can't see the compelling advantage a
>web-administrator-based authorisation-required site gives.
>
>Cheers,
>Al.
>
>  
>

I have to admit a wiki open to all is a good idea if we can keep the 
spammers out.

I support Al's idea to get one up but spammer un-friendly  :)

Ricey