Thank you! Yes, the plan is that I will do the first version myself, then invite those teachers who made the videos (“if you make a new video, would you be so kind to also add it here? also, feel free to add other content”), and finally open it for everyone.
The reason I want to make the first version myself is that I have some strong opinions on what it should be like, and if I make it that way, other people will follow the existing standards. Inviting other people too soon would feel like inviting them to make the design decisions. (I am not really afraid of having my opinions overriden by group consensus: if many people feel differently, who knows, they may be actually right. Rather I am afraid of getting in conflict with the second or third editor, if they turn out to be a quarrelsome person.)
Here are those strong opinions:
the wiki should be a list of resources, not a list of lists of resources. If you have a YouTube channel, I will include your individual videos, not your channel directly. The reason is that this is more convenient for my users: if they want to learn about e.g. quadratic equations, they can click Ctrl+F, type “quadratic equation”, and click on the results (or immediately find out that there are none). Rather than opening dozen lists and searching in each of them separately (and maybe finding out that there is nothing relevant, two hours later). Also, when you have lists of lists, there is typically a large overlap between them, so you have 20 lists of 20 videos each, but that is only 50 videos in total, instead of the naively expected 400. So I’d rather make a list of those 50 videos.
videos with advertising? Yes, but clearly labeled as such. A video with ads is better than no video, but a video without ads is better than a video with ads. So one video would be called e.g. “Roman numerals”, and the other would be called “Roman numerals (contains advertising)”. This will be technically enforced by using a MediaWiki template, where you provide the title of video, name of author, and optionally a flag for ads, and the visual link will be generated automatically. So if you are a user who hates ads, you have the simple option of not clicking the ones labeled as such. If you only have a mild aversion to ads, you can still easily prioritize the videos without ads.
quality threshold? Before going completely open, I will invite teachers, and ask them to only link materials that they would recommend to their students.
no materials beyond paywalls, or even requiring login with free registration. This is a needless complication for the users, and should be discouraged. I assume there are enough directly linkable materials.
(By the way, any kind of materials is allowed, not just videos. But currently I have lots of videos, and I like that.)
Thank you! Yes, the plan is that I will do the first version myself, then invite those teachers who made the videos (“if you make a new video, would you be so kind to also add it here? also, feel free to add other content”), and finally open it for everyone.
The reason I want to make the first version myself is that I have some strong opinions on what it should be like, and if I make it that way, other people will follow the existing standards. Inviting other people too soon would feel like inviting them to make the design decisions. (I am not really afraid of having my opinions overriden by group consensus: if many people feel differently, who knows, they may be actually right. Rather I am afraid of getting in conflict with the second or third editor, if they turn out to be a quarrelsome person.)
Here are those strong opinions:
the wiki should be a list of resources, not a list of lists of resources. If you have a YouTube channel, I will include your individual videos, not your channel directly. The reason is that this is more convenient for my users: if they want to learn about e.g. quadratic equations, they can click Ctrl+F, type “quadratic equation”, and click on the results (or immediately find out that there are none). Rather than opening dozen lists and searching in each of them separately (and maybe finding out that there is nothing relevant, two hours later). Also, when you have lists of lists, there is typically a large overlap between them, so you have 20 lists of 20 videos each, but that is only 50 videos in total, instead of the naively expected 400. So I’d rather make a list of those 50 videos.
videos with advertising? Yes, but clearly labeled as such. A video with ads is better than no video, but a video without ads is better than a video with ads. So one video would be called e.g. “Roman numerals”, and the other would be called “Roman numerals (contains advertising)”. This will be technically enforced by using a MediaWiki template, where you provide the title of video, name of author, and optionally a flag for ads, and the visual link will be generated automatically. So if you are a user who hates ads, you have the simple option of not clicking the ones labeled as such. If you only have a mild aversion to ads, you can still easily prioritize the videos without ads.
quality threshold? Before going completely open, I will invite teachers, and ask them to only link materials that they would recommend to their students.
no materials beyond paywalls, or even requiring login with free registration. This is a needless complication for the users, and should be discouraged. I assume there are enough directly linkable materials.
(By the way, any kind of materials is allowed, not just videos. But currently I have lots of videos, and I like that.)