2012/9/12 Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>

> 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?
>

I agree.

there is a strong demand of specific lobbies to have their own
wikipedia-like.
Wikiliberal (for liberal economics, not US liberal...)
some green wiki
...

We have set a wiki on lenrnews, but we don't have much resource to feed
it...
I just wood like to have basic information, description of various point of
view , even if negative, with arguments.

anyway, is it productive if LENR reach the market in 12 month...



>
> 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
>
>

Reply via email to