In a message dated 10/22/2008 5:07:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time, snowspinner@gmail.com writes:
tend to believe that spreading untrue information, no matter where it came from, is an irresponsible and at times immoral thing to do on a top ten website.>>
-------------------- And what exactly is "unTrue" about the idea that Britney Spears likes cheese ? Really it's quite silly.
Whether Jaron Lanier is a "director" or not is just as silly. What is being "a director" now so offensive as to raise your hackles and call me irresponsible and immoral for citing sources ?
You as well as anyone can weigh in on the appropriate policy board for Attribution/Verifiability and change the way we do things. But really, if we cite reliable published sources, we're doing our job. We don't need to feel the great burden of the world for citing things that turn out to be not accurate.
It's ...done... every... day. And yes by encyclopedias as well as any newspaper. EB puts out correction sheets all the time. We're not in a fishtank alone here. **************Play online games for FREE at Games.com! All of your favorites, no registration required and great graphics – check it out! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1211202682x1200689022/aol?redir= http://www.games.com?ncid=emlcntusgame00000001)
On Oct 22, 2008, at 8:28 PM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
And what exactly is "unTrue" about the idea that Britney Spears likes cheese ? Really it's quite silly.
Whether Jaron Lanier is a "director" or not is just as silly. What is being "a director" now so offensive as to raise your hackles and call me irresponsible and immoral for citing sources ?
And as we all know, a made up example and a single real example prove that there are no actually problematic cases.
You as well as anyone can weigh in on the appropriate policy board for Attribution/Verifiability and change the way we do things.
No I can't, because the policy pages are overrun by idiots who want to be able to write an encyclopedia by robot and who have no regard whatsoever for respectable or usable standards of research. Believe me, I've tried.
But really, if we cite reliable published sources, we're doing our job. We don't need to feel the great burden of the world for citing things that turn out to be not accurate.
No. Our job is not to mindlessly parrot. Our job is to provide useful and accurate information for our readers.
It's ...done... every... day. And yes by encyclopedias as well as any newspaper.
And when it goes wrong and verifiability does not match up with truth, encyclopedias and any newspaper screw up.
EB puts out correction sheets all the time. We're not in a fishtank alone here.
Sure we are. EB actually corrects its errors. We stamp our feet and say "You didn't update your website like we asked you to so it's not an error."
-Phil