Perhaps OverzealousBeginner or NaiveEnthusiast? A different tangent might lead to Terraformer or ProvincialThinker.
Posted by Jon Rand at Jul 05, 2007 15:27
Posted by James Mortimer at Aug 13, 2007 12:55
Great name suggestions!
Your comments are excellent - in principle I agree with Tarraformer but I'm not sure it's a recognizable enough name that people looking for information on this scenario will realize that pattern has the info they need. I'd lean a little more toward NaiveEnthusiast, and I think splitting this out into two topics. Do you want to take the lead on this?
Posted by Stewart Mader at Sep 10, 2007 12:23
Some other name ideas:
Posted by David Goldstein at Sep 14, 2007 19:27
I like Luddite, but I was also drawn to the image of an ostrich for the second meaning (see James' comment).
My offering is “Wikostrich”
Posted by Rick Burnette at Sep 28, 2007 00:22
Agree this could be split. But what I had in mind originally was definitely not Naive nor Zealous . Terraformer is closer to my thoughts although the word is tough to picture as a concept.
Wikiostrich is close too, but I suggest reserving Wikiostrich to a pattern involving people still trying to ignore the very existence of the wiki even after all of a company's key business processes have migrated to it (did this happen to you - anyone? If so let's create [Wikiostrich] page.)
Posted by P. Payette at Oct 25, 2007 14:56
Good article. How about
“It's the way we've always done it.”
It have encountered this kind of thinking we introducing systems with new concepts (not wikis). This how that kind of thinking seems to me. (Provided its not me guilty of it.)
Posted by martin.ellis at Nov 01, 2007 22:34
Do we really need to give it the BEST specific name? why not just a good name?
Currently I'm doing research on which wiki to implement, how to do it, and how not to do it.
I'm reading every article on this website slowly and writing anything I find important to the beginning stages down. So what I'm about to suggest won't work for my method. But the people I suspect you're trying to attract will be those looking for a single point of reference (ie a good wiki). These people will see a “fix your wiki page” (this), then search it, if what they're looking for not found they'll go back to Google and keep searching.
Confluence already has a system in place for this. Labels. All these points are good and we're discussing how much better one title is then the next (ie they're all good descriptive terms) so why not add the terms to the label and rename it to just one of the points and let people search for it using the search engine at the top of the page.
Posted by Nick Cliff at Dec 12, 2007 21:09
I'd like to recommend "Maladapter" <sup></sup> , meaning a person who is attempting to adapt to a new environment, but is doing so in a way that is harmful to them, their environment, or both. You could also call them a “Maladapting Novice”.
Posted by Robert Rapplean at Feb 13, 2008 15:41
Posted by Teresa Ruano at Feb 13, 2008 16:52
I think the name should start with “OldSchool” or “OldGuard” and the suffix should imply the action or activity they are propagating. So far, I've only thought of “BusyBee”, “Drone”, “Repeater”, and “Patterner” as suffixes. I think there could be much better ones when tacked onto “OldSchool”.
Here are examples of what this could yield:
If anybody likes the concept, feel free to play with it.
I think a lot of people commenting here are onto something by suggesting that someone like this can be harnessed to help in positive ways. What you've got is basically someone who wants to help and has embraced the new platform, but has not yet grasped the new paradigm. These people should be treated with patient respect. The wiki paradigm carries with it a shift that goes beyond just the sharing of information. Particularly in strong hierarchical organizations, it is a challenge to the traditional sense of authority. Some people thrive in worlds with clearly defined hierarchy and organization. These same people will unconsciously try to recreate that structure when it's missing. That does not mean that they will always continue to recreate structure where it's not needed. Most likely, the key is to help them feel a sense of belonging and to feel as though their role is clear and useful.
Best of luck to all who encounter these people. I really do think that each one has the potential to be a very useful wiki contributor.
Posted by Justis Peters at Mar 13, 2008 13:42
MalAdapter is the best one; it directly identifies the core of the problem. “Maladapting Participant” is actually even a tad more descriptive. Acurate enough to where I think the original request for a better name change has been reasonably satisfied. So now what?
I'm new to this but am very interested in setting up a wiki so I am literally reading every letter on this site, & clicking all links. I hope to get good advice here and look forward to being an active contributor myself.
My main question is this : this is a discusson that started a year ago. Every single suggestion offered during that year is WAY better than what is still currently being used. Shouldn't there be a consensus-building mechanism in place that at some point triggers the actual change that is being requested? Otherwise what's the point?
I'm not trying to be a smart-ass here; raising a legitemate question regarding effectiveness. This is the first ever “wiki” post I've made so I'm quite curious to see what - if any - feedback / action this will generate.
Don't let me be dissapointed wiki world!
Posted by Aspiral Architect at May 07, 2008 19:07; last updated at May 07, 2008 20:06
What about Wikinoob?
As we have already persons like Wikigardener
However, is someone looking to these posts?
Posted by Jan-Mark de Witte at Aug 19, 2008 03:52
But the people I suspect you're trying to attract will be those looking for a single point of reference (ie a good wiki). These people will see a “fix your wiki page” (this), then search it, if what they're looking for not found they'll go back to Google and keep searching.
Posted by Daniel at Nov 20, 2009 00:10; last updated at Nov 23, 2009 12:55 by barconati
That does not mean that they will always continue to recreate structure where it's not needed. Most likely, the key is to help them feel a sense of belonging and to feel as though their role is clear and useful.
Posted by Daniel at Nov 20, 2009 00:11; last updated at Nov 23, 2009 12:55 by barconati