"Gregory Maxwell" wrote
I believe that while bringing in people who like X to write about X is a good start, it will not be enough to produce even coverage.
I think it's important to point out (a) WP has grown largely by word-of-mouth, (b) it has worked and indeed snowballed; and so (c) we want to continue on the basis of _good_ WoM.
Which is why our reputation matters.
Charles
----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
On 26/11/06, charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
"Gregory Maxwell" wrote
I believe that while bringing in people who like X to write about X is a good start, it will not be enough to produce even coverage.
I think it's important to point out (a) WP has grown largely by word-of-mouth, (b) it has worked and indeed snowballed; and so (c) we want to continue on the basis of _good_ WoM. Which is why our reputation matters.
I suspect our solution to systemic bias in article coverage will be to bring in people interested in those subjects. Because they complain the most about the lack of coverage.
- d.
charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
"Gregory Maxwell" wrote
I believe that while bringing in people who like X to write about X is a good start, it will not be enough to produce even coverage.
I think it's important to point out (a) WP has grown largely by word-of-mouth, (b) it has worked and indeed snowballed; and so (c) we want to continue on the basis of _good_ WoM.
Which is why our reputation matters.
Even more important is that these sound premises reflect the virtue of going back to basics.
Ec