C2 might qualify as the shortest. You will find when you type it in in Google that it is the topRanked site for this moniker (out of over 12 million hits). The same is found using many other search sites.
Wiki, without any additional context, refers to this site.
Yeah, but that meaning is lost now that wiki is more popular. Lots of different engines run it in different forms. If I'm on a page reading "Wiki" in the singular as referring to this site, I know that I'm at c2.com and that the text may be very old, or the author may be an old-timer here. -- ms
Do we all have a lack of better things to do?
"Let's deal with it at that time." We are just at the threshold. -- fp
The PortlandPatternRepository is the name of this specific publication, according to HowToCiteWiki. It is, alas, not a well-known or obvious name. It may even be misleading, now that there is so much non-pattern stuff in it.
There have been, and will continue to be, many OtherWardsWikiNameSuggestions.
Be aware that there are at least two connotations for 'WardsWiki'. One is to distinguish it from other wikis and wiki-like phenomena on the web. "Which wiki are you talking about?" "WardsWiki, of course!" Another is to charge WardCunningham with god duty and privilege amongst these pages, and then to invoke his name in attempt to control the behavior of other wiki participants: ItsWardsWiki. These two connotations are quite different, and any ambiguity among them could be quite significant.
There's another connotation. You can show your gratitude to Ward for this Wiki by following as best you can the GoodStyle he originally proposed, although this seems to have gotten more complicated of late. The impulse to honor Ward, without deifying him, is a helpful and proper one for this Wiki. Trying to imitate Ward may not produce the desired effect. Complicated.
And another - WardsWiki could mean the Ward's software implementation (in contrast to the clones)
No. But it is an observable fact that Ward doesn't police Wiki, despite being begged to do so on innumerable occasions, and has in fact publicly declined to do so (I can't remember the page where he did it but it was a statement along the lines of "I've already stated my position on that as strongly as I can without harming Wiki"). I've met Ward in person, heard him speak, and read his contributions here, these experiences have led me to believe that Wiki is an exercise in emergent behavior. I believe that Ward set up the mechanics of Wiki in the hope that they would lead to certain behaviors and is now watching to see if those behaviors emerge. Stepping in to lay down the law might cause the behaviors but it would at least break the experiment and might excite destruction. Perhaps WardIsLikeGod? in this way. Since Ward chooses not to wield his influence here by telling us what to do, I feel that it is terribly disrespectful and dishonest of others to use his name in order to increase their own influence. -- PhilGoodwin
So this is what God feels like, eh? In truth I have little power beyond the ability to pull the plug. I can't even drive away a persistent pest. So what do I do? I show up occasionally, say something quotable, and then hope for the best. For the rest we have only kind people to thank. Thanks. -- WardCunningham
.:| WARD, "the ability to pull the plug" is not one I would want. Distribute this data that is definitely NOT YOURS over many peer-to-peer machines, or eventually-eventually all your back-up schemes and redundancy measures will fail, PEACE :-) N888 betterdifferent dot com |:.
"Nobody can do everything; everyone can do some." "Perfectionism is the enemy of the good." etc, etc ... thanks, Ward. -- BenTremblay
"The question is, are we in this thing alone, or are we in it together?" - Thomas Bangalter
Or could it be that WikiWikiWeb is an experiment to prove that Anarchy doesn't work? In which case, Ward would never step in to restore order - that would completely skew the experiment, introducing a single leader.
This would be my fear - that Ward <all bowing low> won't do anything to moderate the wild goings-on here. Every discussion needs some moderation eventually, even in a church Bible study group. How about here? Yeah.
Functionally, Wiki = public blog, but is currently better than this implies because folks try to make it work. It's the closest I've seen to an Internet gestalt, and it's subject to Darwinian pressure with usenet, blogs and web forums as competitors. The lack of text formatting has the same egalitarian effect as usenet, i.e. everyone has the same size megaphone, which protects it against commercial abuse. Nonetheless, it is a WhiteBicycleTechnology and thus may be abused to death as it attains critical mass. -- ChrisQuirke
What others are saying - http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?WardsWiki
For even more references to this page try: http://www.google.com/search?q=link:http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WardsWiki
This doesn't seem to work. Why is this?