<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Steve Clancy &#187; slate</title>
	<atom:link href="http://steveclancy.com/tag/slate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://steveclancy.com</link>
	<description>Web developer and sometimes blogger</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2012 22:32:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Can anyone &#8220;edit&#8221; the Wikipedia and Digg?</title>
		<link>http://steveclancy.com/2008/02/23/can-anyone-edit-the-wikipedia-and-digg/</link>
		<comments>http://steveclancy.com/2008/02/23/can-anyone-edit-the-wikipedia-and-digg/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Feb 2008 20:22:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[digg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[slate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wikipedia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://steveclancy.com/2008/02/23/can-anyone-edit-the-wikipedia-and-digg/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Slate: The Wisdom of the Chaperones. This article argues that Digg and Wikipedia are not as &#8220;democratic&#8221; as they suggest they are in concept, because both are tightly managed by a small group of super users. While this sounds bad, &#8230; <a href="http://steveclancy.com/2008/02/23/can-anyone-edit-the-wikipedia-and-digg/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://slate.com/id/2184487">Slate: The Wisdom of the Chaperones</a>. This article argues that Digg and Wikipedia are not as &#8220;democratic&#8221; as they suggest they are in concept, because both are tightly managed by a small group of super users. While this sounds bad, its not particularly surprising that the people who invest the most time on these sites exert the most influence. I would argue the democratic spirit of these sites, <a href="http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/2008/01/05/high-art-the-beautiful-writing-of-anton-ego-in-ratatouille/">a la Anton Ego</a>, is not that anyone can edit but an editor can emerge from anywhere. These sites have self-organized as pure meritocracies which makes them unique.<a href="http://slate.com/id/2184487"><br />
</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://steveclancy.com/2008/02/23/can-anyone-edit-the-wikipedia-and-digg/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

