Sharing the Wiki with DailyDiapers, etc.

Status
Not open for further replies.

BitterGrey

Est. Contributor
Messages
240
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Babyfur
  3. Other
There is a thread at DailyDiapers about starting a Wiki there. It isn't recent, but might be an opportunity. If there is interest in making the ADISC wiki a multi-forum wiki, now would be a good time to discuss it.

I posted there as well to let them know about the ADISC wiki.
 
F

FullMetal

Guest
This is an interesting proposal but I do not think it would be beneficial for this site. Considering; DailyDiapers is not really like this site- it is a mature website targeted towards older DLs (18 and up) who center a lot around their pictures. We on the other hand center around support and do not really target a certain age, but we do have quite a big number of younger people. Also, I am not sure what they could add to the wiki since I have not really explored their site.

Our Wiki is not a secret, they can look at it, and even if they feel the need to they can join this site.

Also, I do not believe that Moo would give any such power of changing or co-running the wiki with someone he does not know, let alone a completely different website.

I understand why you would ask, I am just not sure of the reasoning you have in mind behind the whole idea.

FullMetal
 

Hex

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,215
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Diaper Lover
  3. Babyfur
  4. Sissy
[font="Calibri,Arial"]I agree with FullMetal. while it might benefit them hugely, it's effects would be detrimental on the wikis tone and aims. Though, as it's a wiki, there's nothing to stop them copy/pasting stuff to their wiki.[/font]
 
Messages
3,464
Role
  1. Private
No way. I completely oppose this idea.

In contrast, ADISC has a completely different community and standard than most other *BDL sites, let alone DD. That's not said with arrogance, but rather with emphasis on the point that there's a fundamental difference in the way we approach and view the whole issue. Our community is very heavily reliant on social interactions and a lot of the popular conversation that goes on here isn't about this fetish at all, whereas DD strikes me as the type of place that's centred around the fetish, clearly aimed at those 18+, not to mention pictures are a large part of the site. This would cause way too much conflict over the content that gets put in the wiki, let alone the fact they aren't familiar with our rules and regulations here. I envisage a lot of the content their members put in will get modded out by Danny, which is unnecessary work for him.

Aside from that, Moo seems like the type who wishes to keep all aspects of this place under his control, with content submitted by trustworthy members. Outside his domain is none of his, nor our business, however having outsiders ruin the wiki when we can't do anything about it could be disastrous. We can ban them here, but we'd have to get DD-mods to do the same on their site. It'd also be too much of a hassle to code cross-site integration and ultimately could reflect poorly on us here by being affiliated with a place that is adult-oriented, which let me remind you was the whole reason why we changed from TBDL to ADISC - to remove our image of a "adult-only" site.

Just to surmise that, if they want a wiki, they're free to view ours and sign-up and make their own contributions.
 

BitterGrey

Est. Contributor
Messages
240
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Babyfur
  3. Other
Sorry if I was out of line.

I understand why you would ask, I am just not sure of the reasoning you have in mind behind the whole idea.

Actually, it isn't even a whole idea. There are many details that would need to be worked out. Would they be peer forums, or just other places that link to the ADISC wiki and make contributions as ADISC members? Registration, power sharing (if any), moderation, nomenclature, theming, etc., would all need to be worked out. Additionally, it would need to be worked out between all of the forums on 'the team.'

I did not mean to imply that hammering out all of these details would be easy. Far from it.

But if there is ever to be a unified AB/DL wiki, the groundwork needs to be laid out now. After other sites go though the trouble of fleshing out wikis of their own, unification would involve negotiations about unifying existing content, as well as all of those details. It might not be easy now, and it won't get easier. The opportunity (if one could call it that) would have passed.

No way. I completely oppose this idea.

I don't disagree with any of the reasons given to not team up with DailyDiapers. They are just the first of the other forums that I noticed proposing their own wiki.

They might be the first of many. That is the problem. If there are several AB/DL wikis, then the efforts of those who would contribute to wikis would be divided among them. Much of the content would also be duplicated. Copying and pasting a lot of content from one wiki to another might set off Google's duplicate content filters. To avoid this, the articles would need to be substantially different.

Again, sorry if I was out of line.
 
Last edited:

starshine

Est. Contributor
Messages
3,277
Role
  1. Private
That's what I'd be worried about. Someone just copy/pasting from our Wiki to another, which is sad.

I doubt DailyDi would even take up the offer. I get the impression that he wants to own the sites he works on, and he has a little piece of every part of the ABDL aspect, his forum, ddtube, pay sites, diapermates, etc...

From what I've learned over there, most of those members are opposed to minors in every way, several sharing their feelings about ADISC and other TB sites being a bad idea.

Then you get into adult content. Even if things were to work out, and things were able to be shared, I can see Daily Diapers and other adult websites adding pages on diaper sex, and other things that the minors on ADISC shouldn't be reading.
 

BitterGrey

Est. Contributor
Messages
240
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Babyfur
  3. Other
That's what I'd be worried about. Someone just copy/pasting from our Wiki to another, which is sad.

Well, it isn't just sad. First, it might be several others. Second, Google's duplicate content filter isn't that smart. It might leave one of the duplicates and filter the original.

I doubt DailyDi would even take up the offer.

In general, unification and teamwork is a hard idea to pitch. Everyone wants to be Amazon.com. Back in 2001, I advocated a planned interconnectivity among AB/DL websites. There were even tables showing how interconnectivity was pareto-efficient for the community. For the community. The individual operators would need to divide their effort between new content, interconnectivity, and content agreements. There would be less duplicated effort because of less need to duplicate content, but that would be a long-term savings only. They would also be giving up the chance of becoming _the_ AB/DL website.

From what I've learned over there, most of those members are opposed to minors in every way, several sharing their feelings about ADISC and other TB sites being a bad idea.

Here's a thread discussing the creation of a DD group for teens.

Writing for myself, involvement of an adult in a teen group is too easily misunderstood. When ADISC was under its old name, marked as a teen group, I stayed away because of the risk of misunderstandings. It is a great group with a lot of teens, but it isn't marked as a teen group.
 

starshine

Est. Contributor
Messages
3,277
Role
  1. Private
Here's a thread discussing the creation of a DD group for teens.

Writing for myself, involvement of an adult in a teen group is too easily misunderstood. When ADISC was under its old name, marked as a teen group, I stayed away because of the risk of misunderstandings. It is a great group with a lot of teens, but it isn't marked as a teen group.

That's actually the thread I was thinking of. If I remember correctly, most were opposed, or under the impression that one person moderating everything the teen said would work. I thought what the OP was pitching was a horrid idea that wouldn't work. Old news, though. xD
 

Darkfinn

Banned
Messages
3,676
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
  2. Incontinent
No way. I like some parts of DD... but the site overall is way too adult content for what we have going here. We don't need their stuff mingling with ours.
 

Raccoon

Est. Contributor
Messages
4,161
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
  2. Diaperfur
Fullmetal, Bittergrey, Dreamaker, Lukie. These are all voices that carry a lot of weight for me: and whose voices, at least in this thread I happen to agree.

We are at a critical juncture in our history (when weren't we?) - when preserving our identity - and what we want that identity is - should weigh on our minds. I don't care for anything that smacks of a first step towards a merger. If they want to have their own wiki they can copy articles wholesale, maybe under licence to deal with intellectual property issues. We already have issues to do with moving from a village to a city-like entity; certainly we should wait a while to determine what internal changes we face - and how we want to deal with them, to embrace, reject, or just keep an eye on - before hitching our wagon to an outside entity. Remember that a member can join both sites simultaneously for the different things they offer, including wikis, social structure, and freedoms or restrictions. If DD really wants to share our wiki they can link to it to provide it to their members; but we retain creative and security control.
 

BitterGrey

Est. Contributor
Messages
240
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Babyfur
  3. Other
Fullmetal, Bittergrey, Dreamaker, Lukie. These are all voices that carry a lot of weight for me: and whose voices, at least in this thread I happen to agree.

Would this be a good place to point out that I was trying to announce an opportunity, not to advocate its pursuit?

If they want to have their own wiki they can copy articles wholesale,

This sounds great superficially, but there are risks.

The risk that I've experienced firsthand is Google's duplicate filter. To demonstrate, here is the Google result for a search on the literal first line of text in the article that I've invested the most time in, and that has the most backlinks, What is Infantilism. Normally, a search this specific would be certain to show the article. In this case, it doesn't.

In 2005, I put a lot of time into an AB/DL primer for the website. In 2006, I donated that primer to wikipedia. It wasn't fully finished. Then, I spent a lot of time rewriting and improving the wikipedia article. Some sections from the primer, cut from the wikipedia article, were then reused in the "What is Infantilism" article, which was then desperately in need of updating. The article was later rewritten and no longer has those sections. However, Google branded that article as a wikipedia mirror, and now most anything will be ranked more highly than that article. Google's duplicate filter is filtering the source of the original.

(By the way, Sweet Baby Alice is using that section with permission.)

Please don't read this as an assertion that we should or should not team up with this forum or that forum for wiki development. However, I do believe that ADISC should give careful thought to how it will interact with other forums in terms of wikis. There are risks.
 
Messages
3,464
Role
  1. Private
However, I do believe that ADISC should give careful thought to how it will interact with other forums in terms of wikis. There are risks.

But isn't that an inherent flaw with wiki's based around topics like this fetish. You can make them as neutral as you wish, but ultimate some (or most) of the content is initially written by one person with one personal perspective and one set of experiences. Yes, they can evolve and be edited to include/disregard certain information and become more generalised, but even so, it won't cover everything. The concept of being an infantilist or DL has neither rights nor wrongs; it's all based around accumulated personal experiences and attributes. What's applicable to one person may not be for another. The best we can do is to surmise all the varied information and present reasonable alternatives.

Please don't read this as an assertion that we should or should not team up with this forum or that forum for wiki development.

I don't think people in this thread have really gone in that direction with their replies. You presented an idea and they reasoned why they didn't like it. At the end of the day, I'm sure most of us here realise it would never happen.

It's not that much of a bad idea, but my biggest gripe with it is being affiliated with that site. I have nothing against it, I just don't believe ADISC should be associated with a "proper" fetish site.
 

BitterGrey

Est. Contributor
Messages
240
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Babyfur
  3. Other
Another risk...

This morning, I stumbled across another example of the risks of having multiple, competing wikis.

ADISC's wiki article on IRC is quite good, thanks to the efforts of a number of editors. It includes a general introduction to IRC, the ins and outs of various IRC applications, etc; things that might be in every wiki's and website's page on IRC.

There is one paragraph there that was specific to ADISC. It included the URL to ADISC's IRC channel, and a link. However, the link didn't work. (I made two changes to it, and so it should work now.)

This is an example of how duplicated content can compete with original content. There was clearly a lot of work put into that article, but it went mostly towards duplicated content. It drew effort away from the most important part of the article - the unique part. (The duplicated content competed in a second way - by hiding the unique material among non-unique material.)

This example is convenient for discussion because it doesn't involve an "us" and a "them." As such, it doesn't give a reason to share or not share wikis with DailyDiapers. However, it is an example of how we should give serious thought about duplicating content beforehand. (This would apply to sections, articles, and wikis.) If we don't we'll continue duplicating content, item by item, because it is easier in the short term.
 
Last edited:

Calico

Est. Contributor
Messages
5,334
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
  2. Other
Anyone can have a wiki. People can create their own wikis. So let them do what they want.
 

Martin

Est. Contributor
Messages
3,833
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Diaper Lover
  3. Little
While, yes, I see your point BitterGrey. I don't think it's wise or even possible at this point. Technically, of course it's possible but not practically. Considering the communities.
 

Eulogy

ADISC Moderator
Staff
Messages
1,485
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Babyfur
Firstly, as stated, it's a rather...different site than Adisc, and the sharing would mean that we might end up with a lot of stuff we don't want on there

Secondly: From our current Wiki's "Diaper Commandments"

#25 Thalt shalt not visit, affiliate, or otherwise associate with Deeker.com, Daily Diapers, or any other site that portrays *B/Dls/Furries in a negative light.

Third: Adjoined wiki? Why Bother? If you have a domain, you can make your own wiki on it.
 

BitterGrey

Est. Contributor
Messages
240
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Babyfur
  3. Other
It seems clear that sharing the wiki with them isn't going to happen.

I thought about giving myself -1 rep for my last two posts, which tried to make points that weren't specific to Dailydiapers in a Dailydiapers specific thread. Those points should have been made elsewhere. Here they were, well, pointless.

Perhaps some pretext would help: Understanding Infantilism will be 15 years old next year, so I've starting thinking about what the AB/DL Internet presence will be like after another 15 years. This affects where I should be investing my time. A major factor in that decision is whether there will be one dominant AB/DL wiki, or many AB/DL wikis competing for readers and contributors.
 
Last edited:

Jeremiah

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,283
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
Join Forces without direct cooperation?

A major factor in that decision is whether there will be one dominant AB/DL wiki, or many AB/DL wikis competing for readers and contributors.
I see your point. One universal wiki would be nice for the AB/DL community. The only way that it could work is with an impartial website specifically for everyone. Directly linking ADISC and DailyDiapers is probably not going to work. However, creating a wiki on Understanding Infantilism and allowing both dailydiapers and ADISC members to contribute may work well for everyone except the moderator staff.

Thank you for sharing the concept.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top