Jayjg questions why I oppose linking to the
religioustolerance.org website, citing an
Alexa ranking of 10,000 to 11,000. Let me explain why. Especially as this is the sort of
thing we need content arbitration for.
Religioustolerance.org is run by a group called "Ontario Consultants on Religious
Tolerance". Not very close inspection of their website reveals that this group has
five members, none of whom have any religious training or stature in the religious
community (either in Ontario or elsewhere). Almost all their essays are written by one
man, who is a retired engineer who freely admits his lack of academic or religious
training. This makes the site no better than a blog - after all, I could, if I were so
motivated, start a website, sign up four mates, and write loads of essays. That would not
make those essays quotable (or the website linkable).
It is because
religioustolerance.org is a bunch of (very poorly written) essays written by
a man with absolutely no training or stature in the field of religious tolerance that it
is not suitable as a link. Except, of course, as an example of how a good URL can boost
your number of hits - it's a very good example of that! Since the site is of no
academic significance whatsoever, I do not think we should link to it.
(I add as an aside that where I have removed it I have said that I would have no objection
to a site that provided similar information or arguments provided that it had some
academic or religious stature. Indeed, I would prefer this option, provided the arguments
used in
religioustolerance.org are not so rare as for there to be no link to a site with
suitable stature to replace it.)
Jguk
---------------------------------
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo!
Photos. Get Yahoo! Photos