Cave Canem back online

On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 1:58 PM, Mo Holkar / UKG <lists at ukg.co.uk> wrote: Hi all, Just a quick note to say that we've added the contents of Robert Borski's Cave Canem website to the WolfeWiki. You probably already know that this website, which hasn't been available online for some time, contained a number of Robert's essays and other pieces about The Fifth Head of Cerberus. He's now very kindly agreed to add it to our wiki. Unlike the other wiki material, these Cave Canem pages can't be edited or revised (except by Robert himself), but each has a discussion / annotation page associated with it, where you can make comments, etc. (There are though probably all sorts of bugs and oddities that have been introduced during the conversion process of adding it to the wiki, so if you spot any such, do please let me know so I can correct them.) Anyway, the front page of it is here: http://www.holkar.net/pmwiki/pmwiki.php?n=CaveCanem.Index so please go ahead and read, enjoy and muse upon Cave Canem! best, Mo

At 14:26 08/08/2008, you wrote: So speaking of the WolfeWiki, what license is it under? (I believe choice of license is tremendously important for all the reason adumbrated back during the discussions about setting up a wiki.)

I looked all over the introductions and links, but it doesn't seem to be discussed anywhere, and the wiki also doesn't seem to let me edit anonymously, so...

At 14:26 08/08/2008, you wrote:

So speaking of the WolfeWiki, what license is it under? (I believe choice of license is tremendously important for all the reason adumbrated back during the discussions about setting up a wiki.)

That is an issue that the contributors have not yet discussed.

I looked all over the introductions and links, but it doesn't seem to be discussed anywhere, and the wiki also doesn't seem to let me edit anonymously, so...

That's right -- you have to have a username to edit. You can create a user account by providing a valid email address (which is kept private). best wishes, Mo

Qwern wrote: Mm. Well, since the license situation is unclear I consider there to be no point in registering and contributing. (Life's a bit too short to hamstring the utility of editing or risk making them useless because of derivative works; especially when there's still a ton of work which could be done on Wikipedia, which has no such issues.)

Qwern wrote:

Mm. Well, since the license situation is unclear I consider there to be no point in registering and contributing. (Life's a bit too short to hamstring the utility of editing or risk making them useless because of derivative works; especially when there's still a ton of work which could be done on Wikipedia, which has no such issues.)

I'm about the only active contributor right now other than Mo, though I saw a new registration recently. What about the Gnu Free Document License? That's what Wikipedia uses, so that would seem to handle your objection.

At 23:52 08/08/2008, Gwern wrote: Well, it would handle my objection, yes. But since there is no license in place (or to put it another way, the current license is All Rights Reserved), I would strongly recommend not using the GFDL. The GFDL has many very bad features which have caused Wikipedia tremendous trouble; Wikipedia's not even using the full GFDL, and we've still invested a lot of effort with Creative Commons and the FSF to get the GFDL updated into something not terrible. As I said before, I would recommend public-domain/BSD to start off with, for maximum flexibility. And then if contributors wanted to*, use the Creative Commons ShareAlike license (either with or without Attribution, but avoiding NC). * The primary purpose of using a copyleft license is to prevent people stealing your content and 'closing' it; but honestly, while many people would like to steal and close the Linux kernel, say, I don't really think a small wiki on Wolfeana really needs to worry about that.