-
Wikis, to be useful, should be filled with information, not personal feelings. WillMullaney
-
But they are much more fun with snide humorous remarks embedded in it. Let's not make rocwiki completely dry. —RyDahl
Talk about the parent page:
Note: You must be logged in to add comments
2005-10-05 08:37:56 My impression is that RocWiki is intended to be developed into a comprehensive guide to Rochester. If I'm wrong and it's meant to be a humor site, then my apologies. None of the other schools informational pages are filled with wise-cracks about the make-up of the student body and about the design of the campus. What do others think? —AndrewWheeland
2005-10-05 09:29:46 I'd agree. It's okay to be witty and humorous as long as you are being at least semi-factutal. See the spy bar page for what I think is a good use of humor mixed with valid information (or clever misinformation! who knows!) —JonRobins
2005-10-05 09:37:44 In my opinion: Rocwiki is intended to be a comprehensive guide to the area in a way that other guides fall short. We're not striving for an overall neutral point of view or anything resembling objectivity. We want to reflect and give voice to opinion, individual understandings of the area that might otherwise be lost. While factual information should have priority on any page, we highly value opinion—and humor where it works. A good page to review might be the Democrat & Chronicle. Read over the discussion at the bottom and check out the revision history. I think that disagreement came to a reasonable conclusion. Go by your own instincts though, if you feel that useful information (including opinion) is being obscured, then don't drop this issue. Diversity of opinion is a goal of the wiki, include your own and help make the site stronger. —RobertPolyn
2005-10-05 09:45:58 I also agree, and I was a bit put off by the page. I'm sure it was not intended that way, but it comes off as a bit mean spirited. —FarMcKon
2005-10-05 11:04:30 Perhaps it would be appropriate to add an Opinions page about any given establishment where people could post pro & con opinions/insights. I'm certainly not against humor... Don't get me wrong. But I am for RocWiki being looked upon as an informative resource instead of stomping grounds of a bunch of (in FarMcKon's words) mean-spirited people. —AndrewWheeland
2005-10-07 05:03:41 I don't think anyone working on the wiki is attempting to be rude, I just think humor that comes off OK in person can come off wrong in typing. That is why the wiki is open for anyone to edit. (And is also why Rob is creating a 'Editors Board' to have some kind of final decision makers in such cases). —FarMcKon
2007-09-25 18:42:25 I'm removing the photo because even though it might be funny at first read, after a while, it's annoying to see. Not trying to be too encyclopedic but at the same time, if you want to be funny, there's probably a way to be funny without being so trite. —EugeniaHuang
2007-09-26 02:29:25 We should be careful putting up the RIT logo on RocWiki. RIT is VERY protective of it's trademarks, logos, etc. —StevenDibelius
2007-09-26 03:19:43 Hrmm... that's a good point —EugeniaHuang
2008-02-06 18:17:59 I'm curious to see why some of the parts of this page that come off badly haven't been fixed. I'm a bit hesitant to make changes myself, as I am a new user to RocWiki. —AlainaSomers
2010-02-10 22:35:16 This RocWiki article refers to 4-quarters and 2-semesters. The RIT release doesn't say anything about summertime, but presumably RIT will continue to operate during the summer after switching to semesters. On the current quarter system, there are 4 quarters including the summer, so I guess that means that there will be 3 semesters including summer. I think the RocWiki article added some unclear info by saying that 4-quarters will be reduced to 2-semesters, but I don't know the correction. —GaryGocek
2010-02-10 22:37:35 Gary-it was just announced today in a campus-wide email. All I told you is all I know. Can't speculate on summer as I don't know. —PeteB
