On 30/03/07, William Pietri
It seems to me that an interviewer will for years
to come be able to
easily find something in Wikipedia that is obviously wrong. Treating
that a a problem is accepting a negative premise, which I understand to
be a PR mistake. When people catch us in errors, aren't we better off
going with positive responses that begin with, "Yes, exactly..."?
You got it. "Of course. Wikipedia is not *reliable* in the sense
all checked. It can't be by the process it's written by. You have to
think when you're reading. But if you do, it's good and useful."
("But what if people take it as gospel?" "We can't and don't
to think for people. You have to do that for yourself.")
I take this line every time this comes up - live radio, if not TV -
and it works fine. It would have worked here too.
Well, it more or less DID, and that's what I call dancing.