Re: [Bug-gnupedia] A system of moderation

[Tom Chance]

I think the answer to this classification debate lies
in why we would classify articles anyway. So it is
easier to find the article you want, to understand the
breif meaning of an article you may not recognise the
subject of, or two browse the resource better.

So it seems to me that we would need some sort of
classification up asap. It is silly to suggest that
any classification we decide on now will be relevant
in 20 years, or even four weeks, obviously. So it is
important that any classifications we impose now can
be quickly changed when it suits us.

That, it seems to me, is all this discussion is
getting to...

Tom Chance



--- Mike Warren <address@hidden> wrote: > "Imran
Ghory" <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > An article which may be regarded as factually
> biased today, will
> > almost certainly be regarded as factually biased
> in 30 years time .
> 
> But will an article regarded as factual today be
> regarded as factual
> in 30 years?
> 
> -- 
> address@hidden
> <URL:http://www.mike-warren.com>
> GPG: 0x579911BD :: 87F2 4D98 BDB0 0E90 EE2A  0CF9
> 1087 0884 5799 11BD
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-gnupedia mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnupedia


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices. 
http://auctions.yahoo.com/