What did I disagree with?

I think Nick, as a (possibly) non-professional book reviewer did as good a job as most book reviewers out there.  If the purpose was for me to decide whether I should buy the book or not, he definitely succeeded in grabbing my attention. I agree with Heimdal31 that the gushing enthuisiasm was only to be expected on a biased forum (as this forum definitely is as well)

Further I would not be surprised if the hidden message that a good coordinator is vital for a group with "wisdom" was welcomed at GL.  I could not blame PJ for this, should it be true. I personally would love to be spoken of in the same breath as Linus, which some people do with PJ nowadays

Lastly, to be honest, I would rather read the book than see a competing review. If something has been pre-digested for me, it tends to lose its spice. This of course is just IMO. Once I have seen a movie trailer the probability that I would watch the movie decreases. (I don't get out much)

What did I agree with on your post?

The wisdom lies with the coordinator.  I think this will easily be missed by certain audience members.  You can have all the opinions/analyses/guestimates in the world, but for a problem to be resolved, somebody has to use the information and take action.  I would probably buy the book just to get to that Submarine story and see how big a role hindsight played in it. (It still took HOW MANY months to find it?? the damn thing was 21 yards away)

Aside

That is one reason why I am sceptical about the longevity/usefulness of this website.  Let's imagine someone publishes the answer to all patent concerns worldwide here. Lets imagine it happens to be the ultimate win-win solution (with a step by step plan to make it easy for idiots).  Will anyone benefit? Not sure. Is it worth trying anyway? Here my emotional response is yes and my analytical brain is trying to remind me of that great trailer for Shark Tale that I saw recently...

My 0.02 cents (Zimbabwean).  Of course my opinion is worth very little on this matter, but there it is anyway.

I don't know, Colonel.  I have to admit I was intrigued.  Of course,you are unlikely to get a bad review on Groklaw (or here, for that matter) for a book which says the unwashed masses are better at coming up with the right answer than individual analysts.

I'd think if the fiaSCO of SCO has proved anything it has proved that premise--or perhaps it has merely proved the premise that "most experts aren't."

Either way, I think you can see the roots of this idea in the trial by jury system common in many countries.  The idea there being that a group of common people when offered the help of experts via testimony are more likely to get at the truth than a group of experts, whether that be experts at law or some other area, are.

http://www.fool.com/news/commentary/2004/commentary040624SM.htm