My thoughts exactly.<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 1/3/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Robin Shannon</b> <<a href="mailto:robin@shannon.id.au">robin@shannon.id.au</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On 04/01/07, Benjamin Massey <<a href="mailto:me@benmassey.ca">me@benmassey.ca</a>> wrote:<br>> "Date-specific vandalism"? Bit of an inflammatory term, don't you agree?<br><br>No.<br><br>> At any rate, plenty of well-respected journalistic and news authorities
<br>> aren't above celebrating April Fool's Day. I don't see why we should<br>> hold Wikinews to different standards.<br><br>Because others hold wikimedia projects to higher standards than<br>traditional media. If the NYT or britanica gets something wrong, then
<br>that just shows that no one's perfect. If we get something wrong it<br>proves that this damned new-fangled wiki stuff shouldn't be trusted.<br><br>paz,<br>-rjs.<br><br>--<br>Hit me: <<a href="http://robin.shannon.id.au">
http://robin.shannon.id.au</a>><br>Jab me: <<a href="mailto:FIRSTNAME@LASTNAME.id.au">FIRSTNAME@LASTNAME.id.au</a>><br>"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor<br>should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."
<br> --- George Bush<br>_______________________________________________<br>Wikinews-l mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Wikinews-l@Wikimedia.org">Wikinews-l@Wikimedia.org</a><br><a href="http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l">
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l</a><br></blockquote></div><br>