In a message dated 9/14/2009 1:30:54 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
ft2.wiki(a)gmail.com writes:
If someone writes a paper and knowledge later
advances, let the paper be
updated; provided the update is also peer reviewed it'll mean the topic's
paper is always latest knowledge. Not how it traditionally works, but in a
number of ways, better.>>
If you allow the paper to be updated, than all the old peer-review, votes,
and other attachments have to be blanked out. Do you see that? Let's say
the old paper has a trust level of 8.4 out of 10, with three reviewers and
124 votes of "great" or however its going to work. Plus a dozen inbound links
citing and worse *quoting* it. Now all of that gets chucked in the trash.
All the inbound links no longer reflect anything. It's a mess. And all
that review work is also lost.
Will