photos
One of the nice features is that it does support image upload. Everything gets stored on the server, so there would be no limit to the number of photos uploaded.
As things stand, we have a nice, usable site, that stores conversations. It's like the equivalent of sorting through email threads for information. It's good in that everyone participates, but it has some limitations. First, someone wanting to find information on refurbishing the fuel tanks has to search for all the different comments on it in the different existing threads. Second, there aren't many pictures, since uploading of images isn't supported.
A wiki is a little different in that it is the equivalent of a shared book that
anyone can edit. That means that if Tom writes a great, clear article about fuel tanks, Joe Badwriter can edit and make it better or worse. This actually turns out to be the greatest strength of a wiki. Joe Badwriter is likely to recognize when he can improve something and when he can't. But if he makes it worse, Tom can either rollback the article to his version or just modify the latest version to be something that both Joe Badwriter and he like. The result (in theory) is highly objective, comprehensive material (because subjective material doesn't survive). This is how
http://en.wikipedia.org works.
At this point, I can see the wiki as an addition to the forums. However, let me stress that I don't want to be a policy maker in this community, I just want to be helpful; so let me know what you all think about this.
David
