Soufron's points suggest the foundation avoid approving accreditation or
similar processes; leaving it entirely to community groups. If someone wanted
to sue the 'editors' for actions by someone with a press pass, they would have
to do exactly that -- just as one would have to sue individual encyclopedia
editors for libel.
And this leads to my third and more important point.
Accreditating people
will transform the Foundation from being a publisher to becoming an editor...
The foundation is not a publisher afaik, and I don't see how any policy
decided by community members would make it an editor.
SJ
(ps - If you write for EB or publish an article in the Boston Globe, there
is someone out there protecting you from personal liability. Not so with
Wikipedia and sister projects; perhaps we need a neon warning on the edit
screen, just below the DO NOT SUBMIT COPYRIGHTED WORK WITHOUT PERMISSION.)