mojoehand wrote:
On Jan 7, 7:12 pm, Eric Rucker <bhtoo...@gmail.com> wrote:Actually, the correct method if you have first-hand knowledge, is to post it elsewhere, and then make the edit as an anonymous user, citing your post.Sneaky. I like the way you think :-) Actually, I'm going to just give up. If real facts aren't of interest to them, why should I fight it? I have better things to do.
My feeling exactly. If citations are the only guide, then a frequently repeated lie trumps a seldom repeated truth. I have very little faith in the "wiki" principle, whether it is controlled by unseen editors or by a mob. If it is to make any sense at all, it must be based on the "credentials" of each contributor. It is evident that everything is not known equally by everyone. As a person of some knowledge and good intentions, and an obsessive- compulsive "proofreader", I frequently see things in wikis which are incorrect either in form or in essence (and I am referring to errors of fact, not opinion). I am willing to take the time to edit and proof my corrections, and would welcome someone knowledgeable reviewing them and even contacting me if questions arose, but I am not willing to take the time to fix things if they are often simply blindly restored to their error state. I can only assume then, that for all practical purposes, wiki updating is left to that tiny minority who are willing to research every point (ha!) and cite references. -michael ******** Note new website URL ******** NadaNet and AppleCrate II for Apple II parallel computing! Home page: http://home.comcast.net/~mjmahon/ "The wastebasket is our most important design tool--and it's seriously underused."