I've encountered this article from a diverse group of individuals (starting with Thomas Vander Wal at Microlearning 2006...more on that conference once I get a reliable internet connection to upload my presentation and provide commmentary on Stephen Downes' presentation). Agree or disagree with the main tenets of the author's argument, he presents a contrary view to the mad rush to collectivism that we need to seriously consider DIGITAL MAOISM: The Hazards of the New Online Collectivism: "The problem is in the way the Wikipedia has come to be regarded and used; how it's been elevated to such importance so quickly. And that is part of the larger pattern of the appeal of a new online collectivism that is nothing less than a resurgence of the idea that the collective is all-wise, that it is desirable to have influence concentrated in a bottleneck that can channel the collective with the most verity and force."
Important note - I don't think the collective is all-wise...especially when it over-writes the thoughts of others (as does wikipedia. Those who assume wikipedia is a "wisdom of the crowds" tool don't understand either concept). Wikis over-write the ideas of others with the most recent opinions of the last commenter. Blogs (when aggregated are "wisdom of the crowds"). I enjoy wikis for collaborative work...but the chance of "group-think" is strong in the medium.