In a message dated 4/28/2009 10:14:47 AM Pacific Daylight Time, saintonge@telus.net writes:
But you aren't even allowing editors to use judgement when you dictate what is reliable. You're substituting your judgement for theirs.>>
--------------
By "you" and "you're" are you referring to me myself? If not, then to what do you refer. If so, then please point out where I have stated that I am a dictator.
Will
************** An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221621499x1201450105/aol?redir=http...; bcd=AprilExcScore428NO62)
WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
saintonge@telus.net writes:
But you aren't even allowing editors to use judgement when you dictate what is reliable. You're substituting your judgement for theirs.>>
By "you" and "you're" are you referring to me myself? If not, then to what do you refer. If so, then please point out where I have stated that I am a dictator.
It's good to see that sophistry is alive and well.
I'm sure that my comments were consistent with the statement to which I was replying, and which you conveniently omitted. In all probability, my use of "you" might very well have been equivalent to the more stylistically awkward and Victorian use of "one".
I can assure you that I do not waste my time in an orgy of deletionist fervour viewing or analyzing your edits . If indeed you personally behave as you previously described, and were not merely tacking across tendentious winds, only your own confession would brand you a dictator.
Ec
<<-----Original Message----- From: Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net
I'm sure that my comments were consistent with the statement to which I was replying, and which you conveniently omitted. In all probability, my use of "you" might very well have been equivalent to the more stylistically awkward and Victorian use of "one". >>
I am too dense to understand your language. But now that we've established that you meant "One" then yes one should replace one's own individual judgement of what is a reliable source.
We do not, to my knowledge, have a list of what sources the community deems reliable, and we don't usually go through an orgy of doubt regarding each individual source we encounter. So the only mechanism by which, we can speedily gauge the value of a source is our own individual judgement.
Those who have no judgement, shouldn't try to gauge the value of a source.
That, Ray, is why the project wants and needs experts in each field. Those experts have the level of judgement needed to gauge sources. It's entirely probably that many non-experts do as well, but if anyone feels that they are not worthy of doing that task, then they can certainly leave it for others to do.
Every place I see a citation to certain sources I know to be unreliable, I will strike it out. There is no need to cite unreliable sources, when we have right on Google Books (now) a much better and more reliable source for the subject material.
Will Johnson