--- "Poe, Marshall" <MPoe(a)theatlantic.com> a écrit :
Just a quick reply to Mark on peer review. The
memoirs would not be anonymous. Any reporter worth
his or her salt would try to track down the witness
to see if he/she were credible. If the source could
not be found, or was found to be less than credible,
then the reporter/researcher wouldn't use him/her.
This is SOP in all credible journalism, and works
the same for all sources, no matter where they come
from. Moreover, if a user (such as a reporter)
finds that a source is not credible, then this could
be added to the metadata (a bit like the discussions
on Wikipedia entries).
Seems complicated. Is it doable ? I'm not sure we have
the means to do it. But if we have, it could be great.
You are certainly right that controversial events
will attract POV accounts, and even falsified
accounts. We'll have to trust that users will
understand this, and help identify bad actors. But
I would say that for the vast majority of memoirs,
POV won't really come into play. I saw one of the
last Led Zeppelin concerts with the original line
up. My POV is that it was great, but I have a lot
of other observations that Zep fans and folks
interested in the history of Rock and Roll will be
interested in. Particularly in 100 years.
I'm not sure POV is a problem in this very case, as
long the contributors are honest. The sense of the
project, if I understood right, is precisely to get
testimonies, which means point of view. If you want
objective historical facts, don't ask the man of the
street for testimony.
Traroth
___________________________________________________________________________
Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger
Téléchargez cette version sur
http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com