Dan mentions the possibility of writing a paper by Wiki. He even hints that this could affect legal academia. (And I for one am shocked, shocked at the suggestion that the responsibility of writing legal scholarship might be farmed out to anonymous hooligans on the web, rather than continuing with the time-honored method of farming it out to minimum-wage research assistants).
(Definitional note for those who didn’t read Dan’s post: A wiki is an open website which allows anyone to edit any entry; the most successful is the online encyclopedia Wikipedia).
But let’s ask the real question — is Dan going far enough with wikimania? Or are there more places where wiki adoption could
take the place of help out law professors?
U.S. News unreliable? Princeton Review incomprehensible? Leiter just too political? Welcome to WikiRankings. Every school is ranked, and everyone can participate in the process. Indulge in your urge to tell people that NYU stinks or that [insert your alma mater here] is really the best school in the country. (Potential downside: Columbia grads who insist on continually mentioning the fact that NYU stinks).
Wiki Law Review.
Your article will be read by an unknown number of random web participants, who can vote on which articles they like best. (How is this different from normal law review submission?)
Once accepted for publication, it will be edited through the efforts of anonymous Wikizens and then published online. (Oh, it’s an online journal!).
Hey, I like these innovations so far. Long live Wikis! I suppose it doesn’t hurt any that I’m teaching at Thomas Jefferson — currently ranked #7 in the country, according to WikiRankings* — and that I’ve just had five articles accepted by the Wiki L. Rev. Where else can we introduce Wikis?
Wiki Tenure Committee.
On second thought, let’s not go there.