Harry Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think contributors to a controversial subject must self-identify as > either pro or con. That way readers can *immediately* see from the > user name on which side of the controversy each contributor stands. > Exactly. To simplify: Just have signed articles, like in Encyclopedia Britannica. You can have multiple authors. If the subject is controversial, you can two articles, one by supporters, and one by opponents. Why not? The controversial subject should also be moderated but not in > anonymity. > Right. That is is in line with what Larry Sanger wrote: http://wikipediocracy.com/2012/09/05/on-the-moral-bankruptcy-of-wikipedias-anonymous-administration/ (I appended a comment.) - Jed
