Wikipedia, such as it is, represents its topics accurately to the degree that its editors agree on what’s ‘right’ or ‘true’ — that is, the explicit content of Wikipedia doesn’t express dissent; rather, it is the ‘consensus’ of truth across cultures. Good.
But what would the inverse look like — what if we only saw the boundaries along which communities and cultures and experts ~disagreed, and moreover, what if this was treated as the first-class object of the system? What if we built a community that by nature ignored where we already agree — and took a look at where we’re not getting along?
Now it’s getting interesting…
K
