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 > >
