steven l. rubenstein wrote:
Moreover, no one has mentioned "unpopular" content and Sean is just waving a red herring to distract us from a serious problem. In one of my own messages -- here or at the project page -- I pointed out that one use of such a committee is to ensure that the content is being presented in an NPOV way, or to ensure that the sources are properly represented. Anyone can assert something and cite a book. But in some cases readers need to know whether the author of that book was published by a university press, a trade press, or a vanity press, or whether the book was written by someone with a PhD. in Biblical Studies or Geology. You might think that disputes revolving around such questions would be easy to resolve, and of course, in many cases, they are. But sometimes they are not, and there is a need for some mechanism to arbitrate content.
I fully and totally agree with every bit of this.
And I repeat very very firmly that I will never support _popular voting_ as a substitute for doing this kind of serious work to get things right.
--Jimbo