On 2/11/07, Cheney Shill <halliburton_shill(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm not saying it's correct, or non-biting, or good-faithy,
or open, but Wikipedia takes the same approach as CZ when
it comes to publishing internal issues on your blog or
otherwise making them public. In fact, if you read the
recommendation on this list regarding how to keep
Microsoft-like pay-off incidents (known as wikilobbying)
quiet, it would be fairly obvious that WP and CZ share far
more in common than they differ.
Maybe true, but comparisons of that kind will inevitably lead to comparisons
of personal character, in which case I have to agree with Glen that the tone
seems inappropriate, even if the methods are similar.
Besides, theres nothing wrong with taking a few bucks to edit out some
criticism, or put some dimming star's article on the front page. ;)
The whole point of CZ is greater reliability, but:
The article below may contain errors of fact, bias, grammar, etc. The
Citizendium
Foundation and the participants in the Citizendium project make no
representations
about the reliability of this article or, generally, its suitability for
any purpose. We make
this disclaimer of all Citizendium article versions that have not been
specifically approved."
Sort of says it all.
-SV