Poor, Edmund W wrote:
This is precisely the sort of misunderstanding I was hoping would be averted, if we could convey our neutrality policy properly.
Indeed.
Unfortunately, after a brief encounter with the mailing list, a person who may have considerable influence among readers has now dismissed this project as having any standing as a useful reference.
Well, I think she was really rude to go off like that based on her disagreement with one person's remarks. As it turns out, I think that she's right on the content issue, and that the medical terms are neutral and should be used uniformly in the article.
What are everyone's thoughts on Eileen's evaluation of our editorial policy on articles relating to abortion?
Knee-jerk and not very helpful, that's what I think of her evaluation.
--Jimbo