What would you think if you said “something not unambiguously positive about Oracle WebCenter” on the official Oracle Wiki, only to have all the negativity in your comment edited out?
This is exactly what happened to Stan Vesterli, who made the criticism part of a (failed) experiment. The Denmark-based Oracle professional wanted to see if the Wiki could actually be a place where pro/con discussions about Oracle tools could take place.
Instead, he was “flamed by an Oracle product manager, and any trace of negativity (was) edited out of one of his pages,” Vesterli wrote.
He has not revealed what it was that he actually wrote on the Wiki.
I took a look at the Wiki’s Rules of Conduct, and under the “Create appropriate content” subcategory is the statement:
“Do not use the Oracle Wiki as a platform for political or personal views/opinions, personal publishing projects, or shameless self-promotion (get a blog for that).”
Yes, maybe what he posted was somewhat of a “personal opinion,” (or was it, if based on a weakness that could be proven?). But doesn’t that somewhat defeat the purpose of the Wiki in the first place?
This CMS blogger points out that in the end, Wiki owners have the last say, even if others don’t agree with their moderation tactics. As the customer, we have to be aware of their right to keep damaging information away from competitors.
Which prompts the question: What’s the point? If Oracle’s editing out anything that’s “not unambiguously positive,” is the Wiki a useful source of information? How much credence do you give it? Is it a Wiki or just more product marketing from Oracle?