[WikiEN-l] A future for Nupedia?

[Jens Ropers]

Matt R  matt_crypto at yahoo.co.uk
  Fri Sep 10 14:25:56 UTC 2004

> --- Jens Ropers <ropers at ropersonline.com> wrote:
>> Again, I hold that the "review club" should be very open to all  
>> comers,
>> just as the "edit club". We may choose a more disciplined approach
>> within the "review club" and be more harsh about disturbances, but we
>> absolutely should not ask for (and entrants should not mention their)
>> academic qualifications at the doorstep. Their ''actual writing''
>> should be their sole guarantor. With reference to this post:
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2004-September/ 
>> 030499.html
>> If renowned academic Alice cannot conclusively prove and defend her
>> view of things and layman Bob can, then we should follow Bob. We  
>> should
>> NOT believe something is right just because "the right people" say it.
>> That's a reverse ad-hominem. Go read the [[ad hominem]] article. Do it
>> now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
>
> Or rather, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority

Yea.
Thanks for actually looking up the [[ad hominem]] and [[appeal to  
authority]] articles! :-)

My referencing of a "reverse [[Ad hominem]]" instead of [[Appeal to  
authority]] had the "subtle" ;-) advantage of carrying a negative  
connotation:
Because I regard what I described before as a ''bad'' thing (at least  
in the WP context) -- whereas an [[Appeal to authority]] per definition  
needn't necessarily be bad.
Sneaky me.
;-)

-- Jens [[User:Ropers|Ropers]]
     www.ropersonline.com