I also have done a fairly extensive amount of web work... and I agree, duplicating information is a major no-no from the IT perspective. The problem is that when it comes to stuff like this, the IT is not the problem. The people are the problem.
I have yet to see a forum search function that actually works really well, due to a variety of reasons. I find myself spending ages exploring even some of the largest forums, like howardforums.com. The problem is two-fold. First, there's the issue of designing a clean, solid search interface for a website. That is very solvable. I have in the past developed and deployed clean and easy to use search interfaces, and there are many other examples of them out there.
Second, there is the issue of the actual information you are searching. You see, people use all sorts of different terms and phrases to talk about the same thing, and posts are rarely edited after the fact. That makes it very hard to get search results that encompass all relevant information using just a few standardized keywords.
Furthermore, there's a few other issues with the forum-based approach that you're talking about. Forums are a trickle of information in most cases, people contributing, arguing, correcting themselves - all by adding new posts. This is fine, and actually completely appropriate because forums are centered on discussion. You'll often end up with threads that are very long and you often can't get a comprehensive grasp of the entire subject without reading the entire thread. Or, you get people who summarize the thread every so often... making the thread even longer!
If you want to talk about redundancy of information, think about long threads with all those summaries and repetition. Think about the same old questions being asked over and over again, often in new threads using slightly different terms. Often, people know conceptually what they want, but don't know the exact search terms to look up, or they can find all the information, but they need an "overarching" summary and perspective on the issue. Of course, none of this happens in a very small forum... but forums rarely stay small for long if they're successful. A forum either grows, or mostly dies. Rarely does a forum stay small and information-rich, and that's usually only because of artificial isolation - for example, few other people being aware of the existence of the forum.
Another interesting factor is that forums do not encourage exploration in the same way wikis do. In a wiki, it is trivial to link to a page, even a page that doesn't yet exist. In a forum, to link to a thread, one must track down the URL and copy and paste it, and either end up with a long messy URL or the poster has to spend extra time and make a "pretty" link. The exploratory nature of wikis means that people can gain so much understanding of a topic in an organic manner - instead of slogging through potentially masses of not exactly cohesive postings.
The idea of making "sticky" posts/threads is interesting, but has a few serious flaws. You need a single person or a small group of people that decide the content. Even if others suggest the sticky, they are typically not edited very much, if any, after the fact. And only a limited number of people may clarify, correct, or improve the post. The whole idea of a limited number of people who control all this results in a single point of failure and typically reduces the level of contribution, no matter how good the will of that limited group of people.
The sad part is that people are somewhat split into two groups. The people who know and understand a concept well.. these people are seed members of a forum like this. They see little reason for a wiki because they already understand everything. And there are the people who do not have an understanding, but would like it. It's sort of a lower class / upper class division. It's often hard to move from the lower class to the upper class. In society, the middle class developed to enable this. The upper class had zero interest in seeing a middle class develop, and may have even fought it. But the benefits were undeniable, so it eventually emerged, and with it, our society began to leap forward in terms of technology, economy, etc. The middle class is a catalyst for development. On the internet, wikis have a similar effect, allowing people to move up in "class" if you will.
The bottom line, in my view, is that forums are rather like community meetings or club meetings, with meeting minutes being kept and searchable. A great resource, a great way to get your finger on the pulse of things, and a great way to push the envelope. They play a very valuable role.
Conversely, wikis are more like a community project. They are about distilling the learning from all forms into a more digestible form. And as you do that, it naturally draws more people into the forums, and helps to eliminate useless, redundant questions, overly lengthy threads, etc. More informed users also means more informed posts... so the speed of development of the community can really start to pick up. A wiki makes the forum experience better, and a forum supports the wiki experience. It's a synergistic relationship that, if anything, helps to reduce the overall entropy of information. And I believe you will agree that from an IT standpoint, it is more about the entropy of information as opposed to the quantity - as evidenced by formats like XML.
I fail to understand how this situation equates. If Burger King could advertise their fries at McDonalds, I would bet they would! Or they'd at least try it to see if it was cost-effective. But McDonalds of course does not allow this and our legal framework supports McDonalds' rights as a property owner. However, I really think that you're more pointing out the concept of losing traffic / directing customers to a competitor.
First let me clarify what chocolatealchemy.com does. John runs a product-based business. He sells cocoa beans, grinders, etc. He makes money because people need to buy his product. He makes more money when he gives people information that encourages them to use more of his product. Posting information takes time from his day, which basically equates to costing money. There's also a trivial cost of bandwidth - and I even offered to host the wiki, which would eliminate that cost. But John makes these investments - even if rather small - because it supports the sales of his products.
John does not run a media/advertising business. John does not make money by people simply being at his website and looking at ads or clicking ads; John makes money by people having a demand for his products that he meets. His website is there only to stimulate demand and facilitate commerce.
Linking to other information is good for John. It reduces the amount of time John has to spend putting together information, while driving demand for his products among his customers. Linking to a wiki or integrating a wiki is a great way to do this even better. And if John contributes some to the wiki, that small investment will be amplified (in terms of quality and quantity) by the community. And more information means more sales and hence more profits.
John already links to other electronic and physical resources, for the aforementioned reasons I'm sure:
chocolatealchemy.com/links.phpwww.chocolatealchemy.com/recipes.php (suggests a book)
One last note: A wiki is not a commercial endeavor. If you think I was proposing making any money off it or including advertising or anything like that, I'm sorry I have given you that impression, because it is inaccurate. I am also by no means in competition with this business... I don't sell or have any plans to sell cocoa beans, grinders, etc. I have no interest in this endeavor except to provide something of value to the world as a whole, and I'm proposing that maximal value could be created by synergizing the base of interest already present around chocolatealchemy.com with a wiki.
Public exchange of information it is. Non-copyrighted it is not. (That said, facts and lists of ingredients like found in a recipe cannot be copyrighted, so it serves the same purpose... though so does any other form of information exchange.)
The process you describe is the EXACT same process I'm suggesting, except I'm suggesting putting it into wiki format because it will better leverage the energy applied by John and everybody else. Many hands make for light work. It is amazing all the small typos that are corrected by anonymous users on wikis. I regularly contribute and it's like my work is just magically polished by dozens of often anonymous little fairies. Ok, maybe that's a little too magical sounding... but the point is, it works.
This much, I think we can all agree upon. My fervor for launching a wiki is because I know wikis are the best way to contribute information in an organized, maximally useful format. I'm most likely to contribute more information if a wiki is present. For example, I would gladly start or contribute to a page that details the physical properties of maltitol and provides useful links. Between Sebastian and myself, we could make an awesome page that presents organized information and directions for producing sugar free chocolate at home. Instead, we have a thread that touches on many things multiple times and a few things zero times. We have no ability to polish and improve in collaborative way, just the ability to add more length to facilitate our collaboration.
Brad, I don't want you to think I'm singling you out and picking on you specifically; please realize that I'm just very passionate about a lot of things, and I deeply believe a wiki could add a lot of value in this situation.