Karl Wick wrote:
If it is all built in modules then we can choose to link to any or all of the ones that are there.
Well, I think that's really a dangerous way to proceed. Whenever NPOV is abandoned as an organizing principle, there's a temptation to think "Yeah, this is biased, but anyone who doesn't like it can just remove this module or not read it."
Whatever needs to be said, can be said in an NPOV way.
I think that applies to the issue raised earlier about what things should be included like moral arguments or other perspectives on the subjects covered.
But there's no reason why moral arguments or other perspectives need to be presented in any other way than NPOV.
One of the cool things about a hypertext book is that we can link to all kinds of things that a traditional textbook doesn't have space to print and the reader can choose which parts he wants to read.
Sure, that's true, but we can't let it become an excuse for biased writing.
It's probably instructive to review a philosophy text on ethics. In well written texts, ethical arguments are presented in a neutral fashion. The author need not advocate any of the arguments directly, but the author must present the various viewpoints fairly.
--Jimbo