Amazon launched their Amapedia - a wiki of everything they and all their affiliates sell. I am not sure I get it, though. Just because something is wiki, it doesn’t mean I will get all fired up to go scribbling across their empty articles. Why should I fill in their content for them? Why should I help Amazon sell a bunch of books about fruit?
We all contribute to the wikipedia because we feel like we’re contributing to the Greater Good, The Source, The Permanence of Man. Make it in the wikipedia, and you’ve achieved immortality, in a way. My Grandmother made it– good for her. But where’s the feel-good for writing some ad-copy about a watch? Sure enough– the articles in the Amapedia with the strongest (only?) content are the ones about strategy games, computer games, and pop music. In otherwords, products gravitating towards subjective pop-fluff that the kids like to shout about. We have reached the corporate-sanctioned version of “Clapton is God”, where we delude ourselves to think that subjective opinion will battle it out toward some greater truth.
eCommerce _must_ embrace the community. Content must rely on the mass contributions of the customers. The problem is– how to involve the customers to the point where they feel like writing your ad copy for you?

I first met Scott in English class when we were freshmen at East High School. He was smart, really really smart. The trick was that he was witty and outgoing and cool on top of being smart. Scott wore black and white wingtipped shoes to school because _he_ thought they were cool, nevermind what anyone else thought. That was Scott– he decided what he wanted to do and went after it will all his guts. The same could be said for his music, skating, schoolage, and girls. Later, at University, Scott pointed out the best looking girl on campus (and she was at the time), and told me he would marry her (we had only met her a few hours earlier). Sure enough, six months later, Scott married her.