On 2/11/07, Cheney Shill <halliburton_shill(a)yahoo.com> wrote: 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

Stephen Bain wrote: Put Citizendium in that list alongside a whole lot of sources that people have actually heard of? A list of "places which are often regarded as reliable"? I think that's giving them a bit more credit than they deserve. I'm inclined to think that even mentioning them on this list is giving them more credit than they deserve, but I'll be tolerant for now. -- Tim Starling

Disclaimer: I'm the same David Still that wrote the blog post being discussed. :) On this note, I strongly suggest that you read through as much of the thread as is available. The relevant links, in chronological order, go like this: 1. My original post at Ars Technica, under the username 'stigmata', in which I make many of the same points. I was responded to by Mike Johnson of the CZ Executive Committee ('johnsonmx'). http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/174096756/m/691002192831… 2. The (criticism-only) blog post that followed: http://daveydweeb.com/2007/02/03/and-yet-still-so-far-to-go/ 3. My suggestions for change, based on the previous two posts, and the rejection email from Citizendium-L (be sure to read the forum thread I linked to): http://daveydweeb.com/2007/02/03/and-now-the-suggestions/ 4. My announcement that I'd put a proof-of-concept online, demonstrating one idea for improving the Approval process: http://daveydweeb.com/2007/02/06/making-approval-not-suck/ 5. My bitter response to Larry's rejection of the above idea: http://daveydweeb.com/2007/02/07/citizendium-isnt-interested-in-your-opinio… Those five links provide as close to the full story as is publicly available. I should note that a number of Citizendium contributors have taken a very agreeable stance toward me, as you'd see at my Citizendium talk page and the CZ forum thread linked above -- especially Mike Johnson, who's been very moderate and civil throughout the debate. I'll try not to argue my point too much, here. I just sensed a need to point out a little more of the story. Cheerio, David