From what I can understand EB has created an online version to which users/readers can contribute. When folks make contributions, the EB staff will review that information and, I guess, regurgitate it online. Essentially, you submit what you have to offer, and they decide if it is worthy and correct – they edit it. At least I think I get the process, according to Tom from Britannica. Again, it sounds great to me at first, but the more I think about it, I’m a little disappointed by what they are offering. If I feel I am expert enough to contribute to a page or topic, do I really want them editing my contribution? What if they missed my point? Will they ask ME if what they are publishing is in line with my thoughts – true? How is this really a contribution from me if they make all the decisions?
And another thing . . . I don’t believe EB is free. That’s not very “Wikipedia like.” What’s wrong with EB just being EB? How financially necessary is it for them to compete with Wikipedia? Hang on . . . Who thinks it is totally bizarre that I am suggesting Encyclopedia Britannica is competing with Wikispaces out of financial desperation?
So, what do you think? Will EB’s answer to Wikispaces keep them relevant?