Submissions:2016/DSM 2.0


 * Title: DSM 2.0


 * Theme: Education


 * Academic Peer Review option: y

Presentation
 * Type of submission:
 * Author: Austin Patrick Mcbride

Austin.mcbride@gmail.com
 * E-mail address:
 * Username:Theaustinmcbride


 * Affiliation:


 * Abstract: Mental health organizations are moving towards wiki-like living documents to replace their existing manuals which are designed to help students as well as mental health professionals diagnose mental illness.

This presentation looks to uncover the pros and cons of these future living documents, explores Wikipedia's role or potential future role in regards to external peer review of such documents, freedom of professional speech and democratic vs. authoritarian science.

Austin Patrick Mcbride, a college drop out and "freelance pharmacologist", is qualified to deliver this non-partisan address due to his extensive personal research, untainted candor and disconnection from the economics of professional psychology.

This presentation may also be of personal intrigue to programmers concerned with the SCO vs Linux debacle which occurred in the early 2000s which, had it succeeded, might very well have brought the entire wiki project to its knees (Austin is the eldest son of the man that led the ineffective charge against the open source movement).

With an eclectic variety of influences ranging from psychoanalysis to Orwellian language politics, Austin will take attendees on a healthy exploration of science, language and technologies role in it all.

A few points attendees can expect to hear: a) The DSM revision history, or, a brief history of insanity featuring impersonations of Jacques Lacan, the very sweaty David Foster Wallace as well as a light-hearted yet rousing introductory joke which may or may not have been created by the presenter himself.

b) The role of authority in establishing and controlling insanity. References to one flew over the cuckoo's nest's Miss Ratchet and her modern day equivalent.

c) Technology intervenes! The power to review the past is the future.  Open source future, a personal narrative recounting the days when Austin's family was sent boxes of worms from Linux programmers in order to ruin one family's Christmas.  That boy grew up and realized that while the worm senders might not have been entirely mature in their tactics, they did have the right idea about the future of the internet.

d) Role of authority revisited. Holes still within the power to post. Who gets to post on the new living documents?  How do we reach consensus on what symptoms deserve attention and how to intervene?  At what point do researchers get banned  from access for irresponsible research?

e) Outsiders needed. Reviewing the authority, sharing in the power to say who is crazy and who is not.  A wikipedia feel good story... hopefully.

A question and answer session is encouraged, should the presentation format and time constraints allow for such an exchange.


 * Length of presentation:


 * Special schedule requests:


 * Preferred room size: 20-40


 * Will you attend WikiConference North America if your submission is not accepted?: Hopefully. Depends on my car.  If I am accepted, I'll be there.

Interested attendees
'''If you are interested in attending this session, please sign with your username below. This will help reviewers to decide which sessions are of high interest. Sign with four tildes. ( ~ ).'''


 * 1) Theaustinmcbride.
 * 2)   Blue Rasberry   (talk)  13:23, 31 August 2016 (EDT)