Daniel Mayer wrote:
Anthere wrote:
>There are no limits to what we can assume people
>might label "to be censored". Which is why I am
>against *us* defining what could be censored.
You hit the nail on the head (sic. you are 100% right,
IMO). That is why we need a bunch of external team
certification/sifter projects setting their own
criteria. Let them deal with these issues and let us
get back to business writting a complete, accurate and
NPOV encyclopedia.
Keeping in mind that many of "us"
will want to work on a Sifter/Edupedia project.
-- Toby